Loading...
1990-09-19 QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR IlEETIlfG SEPTEMBER 19TH, 1990 INDEX Area Variance No. 57-1990 Timothy Barber Owner: Dick and Sue Rourke 1. Use Variance No. 58-1990 Taylor and Lisa Stevenson Owner: Howard LaRose 12. Area Variance No. 124-1989 Area Variance No. 61-1990 Area Variance No. 65-1990 Area Variance No. 66-1990 Area Variance No. 67-1990 Use Variance No. 68-1990 Anne M. Parrott 16. Keith L. Harris 17. Robert J. & Gail Huntz 18. Rita Wo He 27. Irene Morgan 30. James M. Weller, P.E. Owner: Joe Roulier 40. THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUfES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 19TH, 1990 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT THEODORE TURNER, CHAIRMAN JOYCE EGGLESTON, ACTING SECRETARY CHARLES SICARD MICHAEL SHEA BRUCE CARR JEFFREY KELLEY MEMBERS ABSENT SUSAN GOETZ ZONING ADMINISTRATOR-PAT COLLARD DEPU'IY TOWN ATTOJUŒY- KARLA CORPUS SENIOR. PLABNER.- LEE A. YORK STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI OLD BUSINESS: AREA VARIANCE NO. 57-1990 TYPE II WR-lA TIMCmIY BADER. OWNER.: DICK AND SUE IIOURKE JAY ROAD, GLEN LAKE FOR. EXPANSION OF EXISTING RESIDENCE. REQUESTING RELIEF FROM SIDE AND SHOJŒLlNE SETBACK JŒQUIJŒMEBTS. (WAltREN COUNTY) TAX MAP NO. 43-1-15 ~ SIZE: 14,400 SQ. FT. SECTION 4.020 D, 7.012 TIMOTHY BARBER TURNER-Last time around, we asked for a survey of the property showing the dimensions that weren't on the application previously, so we have that information. Mr. Barber, you might just as well come to the microphone. Shoreline dimension, is that gping to be 45 feet? MR. BARBER-Forty-five feet, yes, that's from the existing house, not where the P for porch is. It's off the corner of the home, that porch is going to be deleted, that section with the stairs, right there. MR. TURNER-Toward the west end? MR. BARBER-Toward the front of the Lake, there. MR. CARR- It's from the enclosed porch? MR. BARBER-From the enclosed porch, yes. MR. CARR-And that's the nearest distance to the Lake? MR. BARBER-Yes, from the corner stating 23.6. MR. TURNER-Okay, you show a measurement of 19.2 and that's to the existing house, is that correct? MR. BARBER-Yes, that's correct. MR. TURNER-And the 13.2 is your 6 foot addition, is that correct? MR. BARBER-Right. MR. TURNER-Okay, anyone have any questions, for starters? MR. CARR-Mr. Barber, do you know how, at the nearest point of the addition, how far is it to the Lake, from the other corner, I guess, of the existing house. MR. BARBER-It's further than the closest point. I mean, as you can see on the map, I didn't spec that, I just took the closest point to the Lake. As you can see, it's a lot further than what the closest point is. 1 --' MR. KELLEY-Ted, What is the closest point? MR. TURNER-Forty five feet on the west end. Right there, Jeff. MR. KELLEY-Okay, that's not on here. MR. TURNER-No. MR. KELLEY-That was What was on the original, said 45 feet. MR. BARBER-Right. MR. TURNER-Yes, and then there was a question as to the width of the lot, by the neighbor, as to where the actual property line was, at the time. MR. TURNER-The copy of the minutes are in your notes, so, just to refresh your memory. MR. TURNER-You have a note in the corner, Tim, total overall dimension, 30 by 60? MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. TURNER-That's the house, right? MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. TURNER-Thirty wide, sixty long? MR. BARBER-Right, correct. MR. KELLEY-I think some of our question, before, was that the setback was 75 feet and that, in order to stay Where it was, thay could rebuild on the footprint. MR. TURNER-Right. MR. KELLEY-But they were really going to do that in and redo the whole thing and stay in the same, basic, location as it was. MR. TURNER-Same area, right. Now, the camp, as I think he stated before, there's a camp right next door, to the west. MR. BARBER-Yes, to both sides there's a camp. MR. TURNER-Yes, the one to the west, tha argument was made, before, that you couldn't mOve back because the camp to the west would block your view of the Lake and, looking at this diagram, here, it looks like the camp is back, probably, 15 feet or more from the front of the house, from your proposal. MR. BARBER-There's also porches. It's not only t hat camp, there. The next camp down, Which I believe is Higley's, is further ahead than that and if we move back further than that, we wouldn't be able to see around that point. MR. EGGLESTON-I think, Tim, we also asked that you submit some alternate plans. MR. BARBER-Yes. MRS. EGGLESTON-Did you bring any or did you present them to the Planning. MR. BARBER-No, I didn't have any alternate plans that we wanted to ~ with. MR. TURNER-Then you're going to base your application on the fact that that's Where you want to locate What you propose to do? MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. TURNER-Nothing, there's no alternative to your proposed plan, other than What you've got, here, on paper? MR. BARBER-Exactly. 2 -- MRS. EGGLESTON-On this new map, am I right, it doesn't show the shoreline setback? MR. TURNER-That's 45 feet. MRS. EGGLESTON-How do you know that? We asked him to do a survey map and show us, on a map, What the dimensions were, didn't we? MR. TURNER-Yea, we did. MRS. EGGLESTON-And this doesn't do that. So, we're still going by word of mouth, so to speak. MR. CARR-Well, if we had the original map, we could take a scale to it and kind of figure it out ourselves. MR. BARBER-It's between 40 and 45. I measured it a couple of times. MR. SHEA-It hasn't moved. MR. BARBER-It hasn't moved, correct. MR. KELLEY-Well, there's the Staff Input, there. MR. TURNER-Yes, that Staff Input states it's 45 feet. MR. KELLEY-Well, the one dated July 23rd lists a whole lot of conditions that talk about area variances. MR. TURNER-The applicant's asking to upgrade the camp, but they also want to enlarge it and that's not practical difficulty. MR. KELLEY-Well, I think it was aho, we figured out, the first floor was, like, 30 by 60 and the second floor was going to be 30 by 40. MR. TURNER-3600 square feet. MRS. EGGLESTON-Something like that. MR. KELLEY-3100, I think. MRS. EGGLESTON-3100, I think, yes, Which is a lot for right in there. MR. TURNER-And the other fact is that the lot is 225 feet deep. MR. KELLEY-Right. MR. SICARD-It's got quite a raise, there, toward the front. MR. TURNER-Yes. It shows on this. MR. SICARD-Is she going to live there permanently? MR. BARBER-Yes, this is going to be a retirement home. MR. SICARD-It's a permanent home? MR. BARBER-It's a permanent home. the room and size. It's a retirement home, that's why we need MR. SHEA-Tim, you had made some mention, earlier, about the porch, What were you talking about, with regards to the porch? MR. BARBER-I just wanted to state that the dimension that had not come off, you see there's a P in front of the enclosed porch section, there, with a stairway down, that's not where I took the dimension from because that's gPing to be deleted. MR. SHEA-That small stairway step will be deleted. MR. BARBER-Yes, right. MR. SHEA-Not the enclosed porch. 3 MR. BARBER-Not the enclosed porch, no. MRS. EGGLESTON-I'm still confused over this shoreline. I don't mean to dog it to death, but in the Staff Input, they say, "The original plans submitted showed a proposed shoreline setback of 45 ft., although this dhtance was not based on a survey and was not drawn to scale." We asked him to do that. I still don't see that that's been accomplished. Am I wrong? MR. KELLEY-No, you're right. MR. TURNER-You're right. MR. CARR-Well, it's just not on the map. I mean, this is a survey map. MR. BARBER-This is a survey map. MR. KELLEY-Yes, but if you can go through a locate all the dhtances, why can't you give the shoreline one. I mean, that's the critical one we're trying to get a variance for. MRS. EGGLESTON-Right and that's what we're looking for, here, not a proposed, assumed, or. MR. CARR-Do you have the original maps with you? MR. BARBER-No, I don't. No, this is a copy right from the original. MRS. EGGLESTON-We were very specific, I think, at the last meeting, that we needed that. MR. BARBER-Well, I thought that, at the last meeting, we were concerned with getting the side line boundaries established with a survey. The house is where it is. MR. TURNER-Yes, but the shoreline setback is just as critical as the $ide line. MR. KELLEY-Do you know who drew this? You probably do. MR. BARBER-Yes, Rourke's Associates. MR. KELLEY-And they haven't got a scale, on here, of what it is, but if you just take a ruler and you measured the back, \\here it says that the building is 27.4 feet, well, you put a ruler on there, that's about one and three eighths inches. MR. BARBER-Are you going from the front of the crib, there? MR. KELLEY-No, I'm going to, I guess I would say, it would be the back side of the dock or the crib or something and that's about one and three eighths inches to that, \\hich would tell me that that's only 27 feet, but, yet, you're saying that it's 45 feet. MR. BARBER-Forty or forty-five, yes. I measured it. MR. KELLEY-I have trouble believing that because it doesn't, certainly, measure that and if anybody wants the ruler, he can go ahead and throw it on there. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes, Mike would like the ruler. MR. KELLEY-I, really, would say it's about 30 feet, not 45. MR. BARBER-Where that wood dock is, underneath that whole dock section, that is all gravel and earth, you'd go from the front of that dock section, is that correct? It's a sea wall kind of, it's a platform up on top of the land. MR. TURNER-Yes, you'd go from the mean low water mark. MR. BARBER-Right. MR. SHEA-Jeff, you're calculation brings the shoreline setback to, approximately, what? MR. KELLEY-Well, I went to, you see where it says wood dock, it goes all across the front of the property? 4 -- MR. SHEA-Yes. MR. KELLEY-Alright, the, 1'11 call it the back part of the dock or the side of that wood dock that's closest to the house? MR. SHEA-Yea. MR. KELLEY-Okay, I would say that that thing is in the neighborhood of, maybe, like, 30 feet from there to the house. So, I don't think that dock is 15 feet wide. MR. BARBER-No, it's not. MR. KELLEY-So, that tells MR. TURNER-No. me that we aren't even dealing with 45 feet to the house. MR. KELLEY-That it could be, depending on where the mean low water mark is. I think we might be dealing with 30 or 35 feet or something in that realm, not 45 feet. MRS. EGGLESTON-What did you come up with, about the same? MR. SHEA-Well, I think he's right. MR. CARR-But isn't the issue, though, do we want to kind of expand. I mean, if we allow him to expand, it's going to be no closer than the existing building, okay. So, I think the issue is, are we going to force him to go back to 75 feet, or are we going to allow him to expand the building out the 6 feet from the present footprint? In that way, we can clarify that it can be no closer than that, not the corner he's measuring from, but the other corner of the enclosed porch. I mean, if we can say it's no closer than, we don't really have to say it's 36 and a half feet. I mean, that's a set point. MRS. EGGLESTON-But we have to give dimensions. MR. CARR-I don't agree that we have to give dimensions. MR. SICARD-It's existing, is that what you're saying? MR. CARR-Yes, no closer than the existing building, the existing footprint. MR. SICARD-Existing footprint. MR. SHEA-He's entitled to build on the existing footprint. MR. SICARD-That's right. MR. SHEA-So, the exact number of feet that exists, with regards to the shoreline setback, that number is inconsequential, at this point. MR. TURNER-The only reason it exists is the fact that he wants to add to the house. Other than that, it wouldn't exist. MR. CARR-Right, so I think that's the issue. I mean, if he's entitled, or we feel he's entitled to expand the house, then it still is inconsequential how close it is. I think you're right, Jeff. It's probably about 30, 35 feet or whatever, I mean, we can estimate where it is, but the exact figure, for purposes of our resolution, isn't necessary, if we can say, the existing corner. MR. KELLEY-I think the thing that I struggle with is that we have a 75 foot shoreline setback, that's what the requirement is. MR. SICARD-If it was a new building. MR. KELLEY-If it was a new building, okay. We're saying, you can stay where you are, as long as you build in the same footprint. MR. SICARD-That's right. MR. KELLEY-What was the original camp size? 5 -./ MR. BARBER-The width is a hair under 24 feet and the length is 51. MR. KELLEY-Alright, is the 51 all livable or is part of that a porch? MR. BARBER-It's an enclosed porch. It is, basically, livable. There's been beds and cots and dressers out there. MR. KELLEY-Because the last time you were here, I figured out 24 by 51 was 1224 square feet, that would be one floor. MR. BARBER-One floor, right. MR. KELLEY-And you're talking about going from that to a 3100 square foot building, I mean, that's a monstrous change in size to leave at the same setback. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes, it is. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. CARR-Yes, but, I mean, over the summer and last spring, how many people came up from Lake George, all within the 75 foot setback, in Glen Lake, itself. I mean, it seems to me that everybody has established the practical difficulty are very small lots. I mean, perhaps, the building is too big. I don't know. It is a two story building? MR. BARBER-It is. Yes, the front is step down, but it's going to all. MR. SICARD-It's on two levels. MR. BARBER-Right, it's on two levels and the back goes up, as you know. So, actually, looking from the back, you would see the top level and if the lot is low, it's sits right down in there. MR. SICARD-Actually, it was never used for a residence. It was a camp. MR. BARBER-Right, correct. MR. SICARD-It's always been a camp, since I've been there. Now you want to use it for a home. I 'm clo se to it. MR. BARBER-Residence, yes. MR. SICARD-Which probably lends itself to thinking it I S traditional rooms, you probably need it. I don't know. MR. CARR-Is it going to be a total living space of 3100 square feet? MR. BARBER-Yes, the bottom is a full 30 by 60 and the top floor would be 30 by 40. MR. SHEA-What about garage space? MR. BARBER-There'd be one off the, eventually, off the back side, there, somewhere. MR. SHEA-Attached? MR. BARBER-Either attached or detached. We haven't decided on that, yet. MR. TURNER-Okay, any other questions? MR. BARBER-The additional room is needed. It's a retirement home and they're going to live there full time, so the size is needed. MR. CARR-Who's going to live there full time. I mean, for the size? MR. BARBER-Mr. and Mrs. Rourke. MR. CARR-Okay. MR. BARBER-And there's going to be grandchildren in and out and they're children. thirty one hundred square feet is not really that much, the homes, these days, that are being built, I don't feel. 6 MR. CARR-Would a home going up block anybody's view? MR. BARBER-No, as a matter of fact, Wß shot the elevations with a transit and a second story roof on this home would be, approximately, two feet below the, you see the adjoiners, one and a half story, there. It would be, approximately, two and a half feet or so below that roof line because, as I said, the home sits down in a hole and the grade goes up on both sides of it, there. MR. SHEA-And the addition to the west, Tim, you're actually looking to expand the building by six feet? MR. BARBER-Six feet, exactly, yes. MR. SHEA-You're looking to encroach on the side line setback by an additional six feet? MR. BARBER-Six feet, yes and the back, the nine feet, there. MR. KELLEY-I guess I question that it's a minimum relief, in terms of shoreline setback. I don't have a problem with building a 3100 square foot house, great, go for it, you know, but here's a chance to get it back, which was what the Ordinance was all about, to clean up shorelines and give some relief from the waterfront. MR. CARR-But don't you think that was for new built, more than existing? I mean, if we force him back, I mean, he's going to be farther back than everybody around him. MR. BARBER-Right. MR. KELLEY-I'm not saying that he's got to be 75 feet. MR. TURNER-This is new built. MRS. EGGLESTON-This is new built. MR. TURNER-This is a brand new house. MRS. EGGLESTON-He wants to take down what's there and move, so why not make it right? MR. KELLEY-This is a brand new house. MR. CARR-Yes, it is new built, technically. MR. BARBER-But if you put Us 75 feet back, ~'d be looking at everybody's back windows. We might as Wßll have a back lot, instead of a Lake front lot. MR. KELLEY-Well, I'm not saying 75 feet. MRS. EGGLESTON-It just would be nice if we knew exactly what the front was. MR. TURNER-What's the dimension on that enclosed porch, Tim? MR. BARBER-I do not know, off hand. MR. TURNER-The side dimensions? to the, towards the Lake? The width of it, from the front of the house MR. CARR-About 10 feet. MR. BARBER-Yes, I'm not sure. MR. TURNER-Okay, any further questions? MR. SHEA-Is the foundation that's on there, now, the existing footprint that you'll be using, is that salvagable or do you have to start anew? MR. BARBER-No, you'd have to start anew, but we would stay wi thin, as before, the front line from the Lake would definitely stay the same. want to go forward and we sure don't want to go back. you stated We don't 7 ~ MR. TURNER-Any further que~tion~? MR. KELLEY-I ~hould have paid more attention to the Haight and Cu~hing property hou~e, or whatever. I didn't pay much attention to that particular hou~e. MR. BARBER-That hou~e i~ further ahead than the hou~e we're MRS. EGGLESTON-But it'a very amall. It'a one ~tory. MR. BARBER-Then, again, it'~ up higher. ~torie~. It' a up a little higher. It i~ two MRS. EGGLESTON-How about the one on the other ~ide, then. One wa~ a ~mall MR. BARBER-No, they're both ~izeable. They're big camp~. MRS. EGGLESTON-Were they both two ~tory? MR. BARBER-A ~tory and a half, ye~, you would call them. They have, the one on the print, there, ha~ a ~teep roof, probably a ten twelve. The roof goe~ way up and, a~ Monica ~tated, her hou~e i~ two ~tory and that hou~e i~ further ahead than our hou~e, here. It'~ clo~er to the Lake. MR. KELLEY-Well, i~ it clour to the Lake or i~ it ju~t further ahead becau~e the Lake goe~ on an angle. MR. TURNER-The ~horeline. MR. KELLEY-The ~horeline goea on an angle. MR. TURNER-The ahoreline comea out, yea. MR. KELLEY-Let' a aak Mra. Haight. ahoreline? Do you have any idea? What' a the diatance of your houae from the MONICA HAIGHT MRS. HAIGHT-It'a probably about the aame aa theira, except that we ~it in front of them, but our ahoreline goea in. I don't have the dimenaiona from the ahoreline to our porch or our camp. It aita in front of the Rourke'~ camp, but it ia not cloaer to ahoreline becau~e the ahoreline bend~ out, there, and we do not have any wooden dock or anything, that ia the ahoreline, right there, ~ere we are. MR. CARR-Mra. Haight, have you been ahown the propo~al? MRS. HAIGHT-Yea, I have. MR. CARR-What' a your feeling on it? MRS. HAIGHT-I have no objection to aix foot increaae towarda my camp, aa long aa that' ~ where it ia and there' a no extra decking or anything put on and the ahoreline'a your problem. MR. TURNER-She'a about 30 feet from the ahoreline. I juat acaled it off. MR. KELLEY-See, that'a what I think theira really ia. MR. TURNER-Yea, I think 130, too. They could build on the original footprint without a variance. Okay, any further queationa of Mr. Barber? I'll now open the public hearing. P1IIBLIC BEARING OPENED NO OOMK!NT P1DBLIC BEARING «J.OSED froUESPœDlINŒ MR. BARBER-Mr. Turner, did you receive the lettera, do you ~till have the letter a that I had given at the la~t meeting, from the joint neighbora? MRS. EGGLESTON-Yea. MR. BARBER-Could thoae be read aloud? 8 MR. TURNER-We will read them. MR. BARBER-Okay. MRS. EGGLESTON-These are the letters receiveds back in Junes when the application was first filed. This is from Marilyn and Don Higleys on Jay Road: "We heartily approve the plans for expansion and building on the Richard and Sue Rourke propertys Jay Road s Glen Lake. It would definitely enhance our neighborhood and ask for your approval." Thens statement of Monica Haights in opposition to variance request of Richard Rourke. "Ones applicant's plot plan shows a total of 69 feets presentlys house and two side lines. Lot is only 60 feet. Therefore s t here is an error in the plot plan. The proposed dimensions add up to 69 feet. Since lot is 60 feet wide s it has to encroach on someone' s land by nine feet. Two s side line setback on the north is s presently s shown as 22 feet. It's actually 20 feet s according to Haight survey and measurement. Three, proposed side line setback, if variance is granted, on the north, is shown as 16 feet. It will be 14 feet because of two foot error, if granted, or only seven feet, if there's an error of nine feet. Four, adjoining property on norths shown as Doty, is incorrect. It's Haight. Five, adjoining property on north, shown as having no well, incorrect. There is a well on the adjoining property. Six, front setback from the Lake is shown as 45 feet, incorrect. It is 37 to 39 feet. Seven, applicant should be required to present Board with an accurate survey, showing accurate information. It is clear that the information presented to the Board is incorrect. It could be off by nine feet. Eight, house can be built 28 feet wide, instead of 30 feet wides without need of a variances on the north side, toward Haight. Nine, house can be moved two feet to the south without need of variance, on the nort h side s toward Haight. Ten, house could be made longer for additional floor space without asking for any variance. Elevens granting the variance on the north side, as requested by applicant, would officially recognize two feet of my lot as belonging to the applicant. This is wrong. Twelves applicants have not shown any practical difficulty or hardship to justify the variances requested. They have only shown what they would like to do or prefer to do." And we have one from Gene W. Tinney, RR1, Box 1688, Lake George: "To Whom It May Concern: I have been a next door neighbor of the Rourke's for 26 years. They have been wonderful people to live next to all these years. Their plans to build a year round house delights me for three reasons. Ones they will now continue to be my good neighbors. Two, their permanent home will enhance their property and, three, it can only enhance my property and make my summer home more valuable. I totally approve of their plans and have been informed of their plans every step of the way. Their plans to hold off raising and demolishing their camp, until fall, in deference to a summer people s just proves what thoughtful and considerate neighbors they are. I want you to know t hat their plans fully meet with my approval. Sincerelys Gene W. Tinney." And one more from Charles and Mary Sicard: "As owners of property in the vicinity of the above applicants, we wish to advise that we have no objection to requested variance and would hope that the Board would look favorably upon this application." STAFF INPUT Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner (Dated 7/23/90) (attached) Notes from Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner (Dated 9/12/90) (attached) MR. TURNER-Any further comments? MR. KELLEY-Only that I didn't proposals thrown at us, here. said, here you go. see that there was really a lot of alternative I means they got some side line measurements and MR. TURNER-You've got a tremendous increase in the size of the building. MR. KELLEY-I know. MR. SICARD-Of course, they're switching from a camp to a full time houses whichs normally, would call for an increase, if they're going to live there permanently s rather than people just coming up and just spending the night. MR. TURNER-Yes, but they've got a camp that's 24 by 51s now. MR. SICARD-But that includes the porch, doesn't it? Take into consideration the porch, whichs it's true, it's living spaces but it's not living space. 9 '-- MR. TURNER-They could make it living space. MR. KELLEY-We're saying, if you've got a 24 by 51, that's the footprint, and you make it two stories. MR. SICARD-I didn't think it was that big. MR. TURNER-Yes, that's What he stated. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes. MR. KELLEY-That would give you 2,448 square feet. MR. TURNER- Yea . MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes, without increasing the size. MR. KELLEY-That's a pretty big house, without even being here. MRS. EGGLESTON - Ye s . MR. TURNER-Yea, right. MR. TURNER-I don't see any practical difficulty. MR. SICARD-The house is not big for the lot, really. It fits the lot. That kind of a lot lends itself to having that kind of a house, wouldn't you say that? You're a builder. MR. KELLEY-Well, yes, it's a long, narrow house, that's What's there, now. MR. SICARD-You've got a big lot, that's a big house, that still wouldn't be using all the land that's available to them by owning that size of a lot. MR. TURNER-Tim, how many bedrooms are you going to end up with, with what you're proposing? MR. BARBER-It's three bedrooms. MR. TURNER-Three bedrooms. Two up? MR. BARBER-Two up and one down. MRS. EGGLESTON-Did you bring the plans for the house? MR. BARBER-I brought some elevations and just some side drawings of the home. The home is also being widened to kind of conform to its surroundings. A tall, narrow structure does not· go on that size of a lot. It would look totally out of place and a wider structure and pull the top back to 30 by 40 would enhance the property tremendously. MRS. EGGLESTON-Are the plans all drawn for the house? MR. BARBER-They're in the process, yes. MRS. EGGLESTON-We asked you to bring them. MR. BARBER-They're not available, as of yet. I can't control that. elevation shots of the home if you'd like to take a peek. I have MR. TURNER-We'll take a look at them. MR. TURNER-Remember Leonelli? MR. SICARD-Yes. MR. TURNER-Remember he came in and we granted him a variance for the shoreline setback. He's going to build on the footprint of the old camp. He's not going with the house. He's going to remodel the camp that's there, but that's closer to the Lake, then, perhaps MR. SICARD-Of course, basically, that's what he's doing. 10 --- MR. TURNER-Yes, but look at the size of that house. MR. SICARD-See, back in here, What is this, a garage? MR. BARBER-That's going to be, yes. MR. TURNER-Eventually going to be a garage? MR. BARBER-Possibly. I just drew that in there. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. BARBER-This lot steps up. MR. TURNER-That wall terminates MR. BARBER-Yes, this is the wall, right in here, somewhere, and this is all, approximately, four to five feet lower than the rest of the lay of the land, there. So, What you'd actually see is about a story and a half. It would be kind of like a split level and this is the total footprint of the existing house. MR. TURNER-From here to there? MR. BARBER-Right, as you can see, if you brought this whole structure out over the whole footprint, it would look like a monstrosity. MR. SICARD-If this is the future garage, here, is this something that you could do with that, probably, at the present time. MR. BARBER-Yes, we could do that. MR. SICARD-So, you're right back in the footprint of the house, the old house. MRS. EGGLESTON-No, it's six foot wider, Charlie. MR. SICARD-Except for the width. MR. BARBER-Except for the width, yes. MR. TURNER-There's the elevation, in the east and that's a deck off the bedroom. MR. BARBER-That's the top, yes. MR. SICARD-That's what we're talking about, then, this six feet on the side. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. SICARD-Which I don't think is that great an amount. MR. BARBER-If you take this house and cut it down six feet, it's going to, you know what the architecture of the houses of the area around the Lake, it would not fit the lot. The lot's a nice, wide lot. MR. TURNER-Yes. You've got six feet there, so you've probably only got about two feet, there to your overhang. MR. BARBER-Correct, it goes back and forth to, this juts out here. MR. SICARD-Would you be willing to forego this, temporarily? MR. BARBER-The garage section? MR. SICARD-Yes. MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. CARR-But, is that on the plan? MRS. EGGLESTON-No. MR. CARR-That's not on the plan. MR. BARBER-No, I just drew that on there. 11 MR. KELLEY-Charlie, I don't think that's the problem. MR. SICARD-No, but, basically, it's almost back to the footprint, then, except for the six feet. MR. BARBER-Right. For the size of the lot and the hole that it's in, if you put a high, narrow house right where that is, it would not conform to the land right there. MR. TURNER-Yes, but sometimes you can't build a house that you want to build on a certain lot with that certain kind of dimensions. MR. KELLEY-I'd say that's a high, narrow house. MR. TURNER-Tha t 's a high, narrow house, right there. MR. BARBER-Well , it is and it isn't. MR. CARR-It's not as narrow as it could be. MR. BARBER-Right, it's a two story home. MR. SICARD-It could be if you take off six more feet. MR. TURNER-Yes, you're taking off six feet because this is going to jut out, here, and this is going to jut out, here. MR. BARBER-I believe this is about, approximately, four feet and it comes back out. MR. TURNER-From that eave line to the outside. MR. BARBER-Right. It would cut it down drastically, over closet space and the way the, cutting up the hallways and the rooms of the home. Six feet is a lot of room for retirement. MR. TURNER-Do you have any further comments? Motion's in order. MIO'lION TO APPROVE AlŒA VAJHABCE BO. 57-1990 TllIO'rBY BARBER, Introduced by Bruce Carr who moved for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard: As understand it, the applicant will need three area variances and they are as follows: One, grant approval variance from shoreline setback requirements. Dimensions of variance to be no closer to shoreline than existing building and the existing southern corner of the porch. Two, grant a sideline setback variance of 6.8 feet from the southern side of the building to the lot line. Three, grant a total side yard setback variance of 13.2 feet. I believe there are special circunstances applying to this property that do not apply, generally, to other properties in the neighborhood and that it is in a low spot. Strict application of the Ordinance would deprive applicant of reasonable use of land which is currently enjoyed by neighbors. The dimensional requirements of the Ordinance do constitute a practical difficulty, due to the narrowness of this lot and the proximity of the existing building to the Lake and these variances would not be materially detrimental to the Ordinance and represent minimal relief necessary. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Carr, Mr. Shea, Mr. Sicard NOES: Mr s. Eg gleston, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Turner ABSENT: Mrs. Goetz MR. TURNER-Tie vote. The application's rejected. MS. CORPUS-It's denied. MR. TURNER-It's denied. Tie vote denies the application. USE VAtiABŒ NO.. 58-1990 T1PE:: UlLISTED UR-I0 'lA1L0R. AND LISA STEVJI1IISON 0IØE]t: HoaRD LAJ.OSE SHERMAN AVJI1IIUE 'to MALLOR.Y AVJI1IIUE. LEFT (If BA"J1IAN STBET; LEFT (If 12 -- ALTA AVIIII1Jt; 4ft. AND 5TH LOTS 011 LEFT TO PLAO: A SINGLE FAMIL'W' DWELLING MœILE JØ{E 14 FT.. B'W 70 FT.. (XI Len.. TAX HAP NO.. 117-2-41 AND 42 LOT SIZE: 23,865 SQ.. FT.. SEaIeJI 4.020 II: MR. TURNER-Read why we tabled it. MRS. EGGLESTON-The motion to table was at the request of the applicant, in order to provide more information as to the history of the property, as to information on attempted sale of the property. MR. TURNER-Do we have the information? Just read into the record the information that was requested and the information he supplied. MRS. EGGLESTON-Okay. We received, in response to that, the applicant has submitted a letter from Clifford F. Summers, III, realtor and broker (attached) Then we have a deposition from Howard LaRose (attached) MR. TURNER-Anyone have any further questions for Mr. Stevenson? I left the public hearing opened. P1DBLIC BEAltJNG OPIIIt ROSEANN COLOMBE MRS. COLOMBE-Roseann Colombe, Alta Avenue and, at this time, ~ have seven lots on Alta, on Sunset we have two. We do not want mobile homes up there. I am also speaking for our son who also has two lots on Sunset, which is one street over from Alta. Everybody there is trying to upgrade the property, there. They're trying to better their homes, put modulars in, which is not, maybe, from a building sense, as far as going from just construction and, therefore, but still a modular is listed as a home. It is not a trailer and we have checked into it and they said, with a mobile home, it would depreciate the property in homes surrounding that area and I feel that, at this time, it would be a bad thing to do. With everybody else bring it up, I think this would just bring it further down. MR. TURNER-What lots do you own on Alta Avenue? MRS. COLOMBE-117-2-33, 117-2-34 and I don't know the other numbers, but it's 331. something feet on the east side of Alta. MR. TURNER-32, 33, and 34? MRS. COLOMBE-Yes, and whatever else runs consecutively on them, that's where our residence is, at this time. MR. TURNER-Okay. Any questions? MR. KELLEY-The lots that you're speaking of, that you own, are there new houses across the street? MRS. COLOMBE-No, ~ own the whole aide of the street and there is no houses. It's all wooded area. It's all vacant, but, I'd also like to say, since we've been there, which is about 11 years, ~'ve put over $20,000 into our home and I don't want to see a mobile home go in down the street. MR. KELLEY-Maybe I'm misinterpreting it. You said your lots are on Alta? MRS. COLOMBE-Yes. MR. KELLEY-It's your son that's on Sunset? MRS. COLOMBE-Sunset. MR. KELLEY-Okay, but there's new houses on Sunset? MRS. COLOMBE-Not to my knowledge. I was just there, today, and I didn't see any. MR. KELLEY-Okay, ~ll, somebody's got new houses written allover this map. MRS. COLOMBE-No, I think you're thinking about the one that's applied for the mod ular s. 13 -- ''---' MRS. EGGLESTON-Remember the guy that was here? MR. KELLEY-That was Reverend Larson. They put up two houses. MRS. COLOMBE-That's on Nathan. MR. TURNER-They're on Nathan. MRS. EGGLESTON-Nathan, yes. MR. KELLEY-Right. MRS. COLOMBE-Those are modular homes. MR. KELLEY-Right. MRS. COLOMBE-Those are on Nathan and I do believe he's building another modular and, I think, an apartment or duplex type home further down on Sunset. MR. TURNER-No, that was the proposal, but they got turned down. MRS. COLOMBE-Did they get turned down? MR. TURNER-Yes. MRS. COLOMBE-I didn't know that. I knew that's What they were working for. MR. TURNER-Yes, you're right. MR. KELLEY-This map where it says there's new houses, she's saying there aren't houses there. MRS. COLOMBE-There's only three houses on Sunset. Well, actually, there's two houses and one trailer and the one house that's up for sale, Mr. Ingram just passed away. MR. KELLEY-Would you look at this map, for me. Here's Alta. Here's Where this proposed lot is, Miere they want to put this trailer. Here's Sunset. You said your son owns lots on Sunset, so I've got to think, they might be MRS. COLOMBE-Where's Nathan? MR. KELLEY-Right here. This one's Nathan, I believe. This is a fire road, Veterans Road or whatever. It comes up and around. MRS. COLOMBE-Veterans Road, yes. MR. KELLEY-Well, right here, I guess, this would be Veterans Road. This is Western Avenue. This must be Nathan, here, I think. That's Mallory. MRS. COLOMBE-Mallory, Sunset, and Alta. MR. KELLEY-Right. MRS. COLOMBE-This can't be the right thing, here, because the property that they bought is on the other side of Duell's Which is at this end. MR. KELLEY-Okay, wall, the end is right there, supposedly. MRS. COLOMBE-And this is Columbia, okay. MR. KELLEY-Okay. MRS. COLOMBE-Washburn's live here. MR. KELLEY-Where would their land be, down here some place? MRS. COLOMBE-We got the last two at this end and they're right next to us, and then it's Chris Warner and then it's the Smiths, then it's a bunch of lots, right here, Miich I think is the one that you are speaking of, right now, and then there's Duells that live here and then there's like a pump road, here, Miich they're trying to extend Columbia to go over to Veterans because there's no escape route, in an emergency. You'd have to go all the way down this way, or come out, that's 14 --- why w~ mad~ our driv~way com~ thia way, ao w~ can com~ right atraight through b~caua~ w~ hav~ all th~ prop~rty on thia aid~ of th~ atr~~t. MR. KELLEY-Okay, and a~~ wh~r~ it aaya, n~w houa~, n~w houa~, n~w houa~? MRS. COLOMBE-Som~body m~aa~d up. Th~r~' a only thr~~ houa~a th~r~ and on~ b~longa to Mr. Ingram, Who juat paaa~d away. It'a up for aal~ by Blak~. Th~r~'a anoth~r amall houa~, on Suna~t, right n~xt to Ingrama and th~n th~r~'a a trail~r on Suna~t, on thia aid~ of Suna~t, back to back with Alta, Which ia a littl~ trail~r. MR. KELLEY-Okay. Thank you. MR. TURNER-Anyon~ ~la~ wiah to ap~ak, in r~f~r~nc~ to thia application? Non~, okay, public h~aring ia cloa~d. STAFF IBPUl Not~a fram John S. Goralaki, Planner (attach~d) MR. TURNER-Any oth~r corr~apond~nc~? MRS. EGGLESTON-I don't b~li~v~ th~r~ ia. MR. TURNER-Okay, do~a th~ Board want to diacuaa any of th~ m~rita of th~ application? Do you hav~ any thoughta that you want to ~xpr~aa? MR. SHEA-No, juat that, th~r~ may b~ a caa~ for hardahip, but not on~, in my mind, larg~ ~nough to warrant th~ granting of a varianc~ for a mobil~ hom~ b~caua~ th~r~ can b~ a hom~ put on that, a modular hom~ put on that, a numb~r of oth~r thinga. MRS. EGGLESTON-Y~a. MR. SHEA-But, I think th~ d~trim~nt to th~ n~ighborhood far out w~igha th~ hardahip caa~ . MR. TURNER-I think th~ d~trim~nt li~a in th~ iota not b~ing abl~ to obtain a cl~ar titl~, that'a a d~trim~nt. I think that'a th~ hardahip on th~ lot. MRS. EGGLESTON-S~~, I hav~n' t chang~d my opinion about putting a trail~r in th~ ar~aa wh~r~ not p~rmitt~d. Th~r~' a ao many p~opl~ that want to do it and th~y juat know th~y can't. MR. TURNER-Juat to r~fr~ah your m~mory, th~y ar~ in a mobil~ hom~ trail~r court, right now, with th~ir trail~r. MRS. EGGLESTON-So, What ar~ your thoughta? MR. SICARD-Ar~n't th~y r~nting a lot? MR. TURNER-Th~y own th~ trail~r. Th~y'r~ going to r~nt th~ lot. MR. CARR-I'm not aur~ that th~ affidavita aubmitt~d ahow a, I m~an, it do~a ahow a condat~nt att~mpt by Mr. LaRoa~ to a~ll th~ prop~rty, but I don't know if it com~a to th~ point of impodng a financial hardahip auch that any ua~ of th~ prop~rty, to th~ own~r, that h~ couldn't ua~ th~ prop~rty aa zon~d. I think I would hav~ lik~d to hav~ a~~n it liat~d for mor~ than on~ y~ar with a r~altor. MR. TURNER-That'a aix y~ara ago. MR. CARR-And aix y~ara ago or fiv~ y~ara ago, wh~n~v~r it waa. MR. TURNER-Y~a. MR. KELLEY-My p~raonal f~~linga ar~ that th~ difficulty of a~lling a lot ia that it waa bought at a tax aal~ and, probably, can't ~v~n g~t titl~ inauranc~. MRS. EGGLESTON-Y~a. MR. TURNER-Yea. MR. KELLEY-So, I m~an, if you inv~at~d a bunch of mon~y on a pi~c~ of prop~rty, you' r~ putting youra~lf at a pr~tty good riak. is ~ --- MR. TURNER-Right. MR. SICARD-Isn't there a Statue of Limitations on that? MS. CORPUS-It takes 40 years for title to clear the tax deed. MR. SICARD-40 years? MR. KELLEY-I mean, I think that's the owners hardship, right there, that's the way he bought it. MR. TURNER-Right. MR. KELLEY-And I guess my other feeling is, it is a UR-I0 zone. We've got people who have just put new houses up there, who are having trouble selling them. To do this, only makes his situation worse. The guy tried to help the area. MR. TURNER-Right. MR. KELLEY-I give him credit for that. I don't know if it was a great decision, but he went in the right direction. MRS. EGGLESTON-Right. MR. KELLEY-And now, to shoot him in the foot, I have a little trouble with that. MR. TURNER-Right. Okay, motions in order. MOTION TO DENY USE VARIANCE NO. 58-1990 TAYLOR AND LISA STEVENSON, Introduced by Michael Shea who moved for its adoption, seconded by Joyce Eggleston: The owner has not demonstrated conclusive evidence as to financial hardship combined with the difficulties with clearing title to this property. Further, I think the granting of this variance would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shea, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mrs. Goetz AREA VARIANCE NO. 124-1989 TYPE: UNLISTED WR-1A ANNE M. PARROTT OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE OFF BIG BAY ROAD TO REMOVE THE PRESENT BUILDING AND CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ACOORDING TO THE PRESENT BUILDING OODES; IN BASICALLY THE SAME LOCATION. (WARREN Q)UNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 144-1-36 & 37 Lar SIZE: 0.22 ACRES SECTION 9.010 MR. TURNER-And this is for an extension of the Variance, 124-1989, to allow the applicant to have more time to proceed with a building. MOTION TO GRANT EXTENSION OF VARIANCE NO. 124-1989 ANNE H. PARROTT, Introduced by Theodore Turner Who moved for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard: For a period of one year. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Carr, Mr. Shea, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mrs. Goetz AREA VABlANŒ NO. 61-1990 TYPE II n-3A KEITH L. HARRIS OWE.: KEITH AND PAMELA BARRIS NORTH OF PIoa.E HILL IIOAD FOR. AN ADDITION OF A BEDJO(JI, BATH, DINING, FAMILY RC>œ TO EXISTING HOUSE. REQUESTING RELIEF FIOI FJIONT SETBACK JmQUIIlEMENTS. TAX MAP NO. 26-2-12 Lar SIZE: 143 FT. BY 200 FT. SEcrIŒ 4.020 C KEITH HARRIS, PRESENT 16 -- MRS. EGGLESTON-We had a motion to table, to allow the applicant to obtain a survey of the property. MR. TURNER-Survey was submitted, as requested. We have a copy of it. I think you better read the Staff Notes, first, and that will help clarify a lot. STAFF INPtDT Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner (attached) MR. CARR-Lee, could I ask you, is this a nonconforming structùre? MRS. YORK-Yes, it is. MR. CARR-Why? MRS. YORK-Because it currently doesn't meet the setbacks. Am I correct, Pat? MRS. COLLARD-Yes, she's correct. MR. CARR-Okay. MR. TURNER-Bruce, just for information, he took the measurements from the survey stakes that were across the road, Which is his property and went back, from them, to obtain the measurements he shows on here. MR. CARR-Okay. MR. TURNER-Rather than have a survey done because the other lot was surveyed. MR. CARR-Alright. I mean, my position, last meeting, ~s that, and it holds true for the same argument I made for Glen Lake, as long as it's no closer to the road, then I don't think we need the exact survey and he's saying it's two feet back from the closest building already existing. So, for me, for the front yard setback, I'm satisfied without the professional survey. MR. TURNER-Do you have any questions for Mr. Harris, anyone? MR. SHEA-Well, What about the expansion of the addition? Is that greater than 50 percent of the existing? Do we have the exact dimensions of the existing? MRS. COLLARD-Mike, in answer to that question, Dave and I met with Mr. Harris, and it is not 50 percent. MR. SHEA-It is less than? MRS. COLLARD-No. It's less than. MR. CARR-So, we don't have to worry about 9.0ll.B? MRS. COLLARD-No. MR. CARR-So, all we're worrying about is the front yard setback? MR. TURNER-Front yard setback. MRS. COLLARD - Ye s . MR. TURNER-You don't have any questions of Mr. Harris, anyone? MR. SHEA-Was this open to the public, last time? MR. TURNER-We didn't close it. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes, because the lady from the League of Women Voters spoke. MR. TURNER-Yes, we opened it, but I don't think I closed it because I think we tabled it. P1DBLIC BEARING OPIIØ 17 --" NO cømllJtT PUBLI~ Bll'AJRING (J.OSIID MR. KELLEY- You said that, did you talk to him, or you knew, somehow, that it was taken from the stakes right across the street? MR. TURNER-Yes, he had survey stakes across the road, so he took, I mean, he had that as a recent survey. MR. KELLEY-Right, and that is a 50 foot Town road? MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-So, it's got to be fairly close. MR. TURNER-I talked with Pat and her and Dave, I guess they were satisfied that the dimensions were correct, satisfactory. Mr. Harris, this is going to be one story, is it, Or what? MR. HARRIS-Yes, it is. There's going to be a cellar there, but it's just going to be for heating. MR. KELLEY-Are you going to have a garage underneath it? MR. HARRIS-No, I'm not. I'm going to build a garage, someday, a private garage. MR. KELLEY-The only reason I ask is, you were here, before, trying to get a garage and I'm saying, gee, if you did this thing right, you may be able to get the garage underneath it. MR. HARRIS-Yes, ~ll, I was after a storage addition to keep what I had preexisting, out of the rain, \\hich I tore down yesterday and I put up some 10 by 10 sheds, \\hich look much more appealing. MR. TURNER-Have you guys got any questions over here? thank you. I guess we don't have any further questions. Are you satisfied? Motion's in order. Okay, lIIO'lION TO APPROVE A.RItA VARIANCE RO. 61-1990 qlTH L. HAUlS, Introduced by Bruce Carr who moved for its adoption, seconded by Jeffrey Kelley: Granting Mr. Harris a 23 and a half foot variance from front yard setback requirement of 50 feet. He has established practical difficulty, in that the existing home to which addition is to be constructed is already within the setback zone and that this variance will not be detrimental to the Ordinance and the variance represents minimal relief necessary. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Sicard, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Carr, Mr. Shea, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mrs. Goetz MR. HARRIS-Thank you. I think that when I get it done, it will be a lot more appealing to the neighbors. Thank you. MR. TURNER-Thanks, Keith. NEW BUSINESS: ABA VARlANCZ NO.. 65-1990 T1PE II a-1A IlOBElŒ' J.. & GAIL JØJt'l'Z OWfER: SAME AS ABOVE 257B S1JIN'1SIDE ROAD FOR CONSTRUCTION ($ A 26 ".. By 34 F'I.. GAJtAGI/pOBT VIm L($'I.. JŒQœSTING IŒLIØ' FJItOM SIDItYA:RD. SHOlŒLIQ SI'lBAOtS, AND SEPARATION JŒQlO)lBD BE'l'IIEEN HOUSE AND GARAœ.. (aDEN 001JNTY PLANNING) TAX IIAP NO. 46-3-9 LOT SIZE: 21,993 SJq..".. SEalON 4.020 (D),}..074 A(2) ROBERT HUNTZ, PRESENT MR. TURNER-The garage, what ænenities is the garage going to have, upstairs? 18 "-" MR. HUNTZ-It's going to be a single room. MR. TURNER-One room? MR. HUNTZ-One room. MR. TURNER-Toilet? MR. HUNTZ-Yes, we're planning a bathroom in there, that's it. MR. TURNER-Single room will encompass what, bedroom? MR. HUNTZ-Yes, it'll just be a bedroom. MR. TURNER-Just a bedroom? MR. HUNTZ-Right. MR. KELLEY-The existing house, how many bedrooms does that, presently, have? MR. HUNTZ-It has three. MR. KELLEY-The proposed garage shows as being six feet from the existing house. MR. HUNTZ-Yes. MR. KELLEY-Are you actually gping to attach that, in some way, Or is it just going to be a space? MR. HUNTZ-Well, there's going to be a space there, with a decorative little stone wall and a gate to go through. MR. KELLEY-But, other than that, the buildings aren't going to connect to each other, per se? MR. HUNTZ-No, they're not. MR. TURNER-Jeff, mat you're distance on the back Corner of the garage to the house? Have you gpt your ruler right there? It looks like it might be 25 feet or better. One inch is 32 feet. MR. KELLEY-It's just under half an inch, that would be 16 feet, since one inch equals 32 feet. A half inch would be 16, so it would probably meet the 10 in the back, from the looks of it. MR. HUNTZ-Yes, it certainly would be more than 10 in the back. MR. TURNER-The back of the house, \\here does that slope start, that goes down to the Lake? How far are you from the actual? MR. HUNTZ-Well, actually, right behind the house, if you go straight out, it's, probably, about 20 feet, before it starts to slope down. MR. TURNER-Is that your deck and the stairway down to the Lake? MR. HUNTZ-Yes. It's not finished yet, but it's being built. MR. TURNER-Has he got a permit for that? MRS. COLLARD-I don't know. Do you have a building permit for your deck? MR. HUNTZ-The permit for that is, well, I got several years ago and we never finished it, for a dock and a stairway gping down. MR. TURNER-That expires in a year. MR. HUNTZ-Well, I came here, one day, and asked if I needed another permit and I was told I did not, to put the stairs in. MR. TURNER-How long ago? Yes, but the deck encroaches on the shoreline setback, now. 19 --- --,0 MR. HUNTZ-Well, that was what we had proposed, originally, I remember what year it was, like, 1986, when we did that. MR. TURNER-That would have been 50 feet, then. Now, it's 75. MR. HUNTZ-I thought that was approved, then. MRS. COLLARD-Well, at the time he built the deck, ~sn' t it within the setback requirements? MR. TURNER-I don't know. I don't know how far it is from the Lake, but it looks pretty close, if you drive around the corner. MR. KELLEY-Well, there's another deck, Pat, other than what's shown on there. MR. HUNTZ-Yes, that's connected to the MR. TURNER-There's a stairway and a deck that goes right down. The deck is right near the Lake. MR. KELLEY-It doesn't show on this. MR. TURNER-It doesn't show on this. MRS. COLLARD-Okay. MR. TURNER-And he shows 60 feet from the back of the house to Lake Sunnyside. MR. HUNTZ -Yes, that's COrrect. MR. TURNER-So, he's definitely within the shoreline. MR. HUNTZ-Yes, that's part of the, it's a stairway and a small deck to get down to the Lake front. MR. TURNER-Yes, I saw it. MR. HUNTZ-Otherwise, it's too steep to walk down. We've been walking down the slope, but grandma can't get down there, so we need to build a stairway. MR. CARR-You have a port on the back of the garage, that's for your boat? MR. HUNTZ-Well, our original plan, when we designed the house back in 1984, ~s to have a three car garage along side, Wlich would have been 30 feet wide, but when I found out the zoning was changed since then, ~ cut it back, so it would just be a two car garage, and it'll be an open port, in the back, so we could put our boat back there, that way we stay within, ~'re further from the boundary than if it were a 30 foot garage, with the three ports. MR. CARR-Is it still possible for you to build a three car garage, there. MR. HUNTZ -No. MR. CARR-I mean, is that an alternate? MR. HUNTZ-That would be worse. It would violate the present setbacks. MR. CARR-Right, but it wouldn't violate the shoreline setback. I mean, you're still going to violate the side yard setback and at least there's a whole rOW of trees and brush there, separating you from your neighbor and, even with a two car garage, you are violating the side yard setback. So, that's one way to add another, I guess you said it would go from a 26 foot garage to a 30 foot garage? MR. HUNTZ-Yes. MR. CARR-So, it's only another four feet and, yet, then you wouldn't have to be within the shoreline setback at all. MR. HUNTZ-Yes, because the port wouldn't be in the back. MR. CARR-Right. MR. HUNTZ-It would be on the side. 20 '---- MR. CARR-You'd meet the 75 foot. So, I guess, if that's an alternative for you, it might be an alternative for this Board to consider. MR. SHEA-It would be based on minimal relief. MR. CARR-Right. Add four feet to the side yard setback, Wiich is covered by a row of trees, and then take him all the way out of the EnvironIll&ntally Critical Area of the shoreline. You have a well, there, is that going to create a problem? MR. HUNTZ-I'd have to re-check the measurements, Wiether that would be in the way or not. MR. KELLEY-What's the size of the boat? MR. HUNTZ-I think it's 19, a 19 foot boat. MR. KELLEY-Do you know the width of it, roughly? MR. HUNTZ -I would guess it's probably 7, 7 feet wide, something like that. MR. KELLEY-Yes. I guess what I'm getting at, this storage port, or whatever, being 10 feet, trying to listen to what they're saying, and say, alright, let's say if you maybe move something over on the side, how far out, really, ~uld you have to go to be able to slide this boat in and, since, if we recommended that or whatever, obviously, w=' d want to keep you as far away from the side property line as possible and if 10 feet were not absolutely necessary, w= might say, alright, can you go back to 8 feet, maybe, and still be able to, I can appreciate what you want to do to put the boat in, that I understand. MR. HUNTZ-Right. I think that 30 feet would probably be m1.n1.mtml that you could have the two car garage and also roan for the boat, that would be difficult, but we redesigned this, based on the setbacks, figuring that the house is 60 feet from the Lake, Wiich met the Ordinance at the time, that even the port would still be 65 feet from the Lake, Which is more than the house is now. So, I didn't think that would be a problem. MR. CARR-I'm not saying it's a problem. I'm just saying it's a consideration. MR. HUNTZ-Yes. MR. CARR-I mean, perhaps, w= can, instead of g1.v1.ng three variances, you might only need two variances, although one of the variances will be larger than what you requested. MR. TURNER-Right. MR. CARR-And, just because of the layout of the land, I was thinking, with the natural brush border, if you're right on the property line, if nobody's going to see it, maybe that's better than having you closer to the Lake. I don't know. I think that's something for the Board to consider. MR. HUNTZ-I would think, if I owned the property next door, I'd probably prefer this plan to one coming even do ser to the line, al though we could do it &i ther way. MR. SHEA-Mr. Huntz, ~s there a specific reason why the garage is a detached garage, rather than attached to the home? MR. HUNTZ-Yes, w= wanted a little patio area in between. Plus, there are some windows for bedrO(Jl1s on that side of the house, that would be covered if we put it right up next to it. MR. KELLEY-The garage proposal, Wiich way is the ridge line running? MR. HUNTZ-The same as the house. MR. KELLEY-Okay, with the slope toward the front? MR. HUNTZ-Towards the front, yes. MR. KELLEY-Is it going to be even, both side, or is it kind of a salt box? 21 -- MR. HUNTZ-Yes, salt box. MR. KELLEY-In the rear because of the port type thing? MR. HUNTZ -Yes. MR. KELLEY-Okay. MR. HUNTZ-Actually, the house is also sort of a salt box and that would kind of conform and match. MR. TURNER-Any other questions? None. Alright, let me open the public hearing. PtllBLIC IlltAUNG OPIBIID ELAINE COPPOTELLO MRS. COPPOTELLO-Hi. I'm Elaine Coppotello. My husband and I own a home on Lot 7, the closest, only, home to them. We're one lot away. We have no objection to you giving them the variance. We feel that they've kept their home up. What they want to do will only enhance the value of their property and ours. They've done a really swell job with their home in the past. We have no objections at all and we hope that you'll give it to them. MR. CARR-Excuse me, you're the property MRS. COPPOTELLO-Seven. MR. CARR-Okay, you're not the Lukas property. You're next door. MRS. COPPOTELLO-No, there's no home on the Lukas property. It's just a vacant lot. So, ~ would be the closest to them, at this point. MR. CARR-Okay. MRS. COPPOTELLO-And we feel what they're doing is really, ~'ve seen pictures that they've shown us, and I think it's great. Thank you. MR. TURNER-Anyone else wish to be heard? None. Public Hearing's closed. PUBLIC BEAnNG o.OSED <roRRESPœDØO Warren County Planning Board returned No County Impact STAFF INPUT Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner (attached) MR. TURNER-Any discussion? Any thoughts? MR. CARR-What do you think about being within the Lakeshore setback, as opposed to a side line setback? You have a 10 foot Lakeshore setback, as opposed to an additional four feet, total eight feet, side line. MR. TURNER-You've got 65 to the corner of the carport, so that's 10, you're right, that's 10 feet. MRS. EGGLESTON-Who's property is the brush on? MR. CARR-It says Lukas, Mr. Joseph J. Lukas. MRS. EGGLESTON-So, \\hat if Mr. Lukas shared this property, then there's no, then this building would be right on the lot line. So, for my way of thinking, you might better go closer. MR. CARR-To the Lake? MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes, than sO close to the line. MR. SHEA-And, again, there too, you're not gQing any closer to the shoreline than the existing structure. 22 ----- MRS. EGGLESTON-Than they already are, right. MR. KELLEY-I've got a question for Mr. Huntz. The proposed garage is 26 feet wide and you said, originally, you had kind of talked about 30 feet. MR. HUNTZ- Yes. MR. KELLEY-If you had it 30 feet wide, were you going to put two cars and the boat in it, that way? MR. HUNTZ-Yes. MR. KELLEY-Okay, so, in theory, would you be saying that the garage was more like 24 feet and you were allowing six feet for the boat, roughly? MR. HUNTZ-Well, the way garages work, I mean, I talked with the builder and he said if you build a 24 foot, you're probably getting at that, a 24 foot garage, then it's tight. I mean you're getting out with doors and that kind of thing. The 26 is much better and that's Why we proposed that. MR. KELLEY-But I, to go back to the 30 feet that you said you had thought about. MR. HUNTZ-That' s What we originally thought about. We really would like to have a 32 foot, but that wouldn't fit with the setback. MR. KELLEY-Okay. MR. HUNTZ-We originally did not know that a detached garage had to be 10 feet away. We were going to angle it right from the corner, Wtich would have gained us that six feet, but because we found out about the Ordinance of 10 feet, wa said, wall, six is better than nothing. So, that's Why we moved it. MR. KELLEY-Well, I gueøø, Wiat I was trying to get at, if you could get two cars on 24 feet and you had six feet left for this boat, could you then, based on that thinking, make your port in the back six feet wide instead of 10 feet, then you'd be 69 feet from the shore. You'd still have, you know, a 26 foot garage, to me, makes more sense than a 24, because what you said is true. You've got a little more rOom for the doors opening up and that sort of thing. MR. HUNTZ-Sure. MR. KELLEY-But, again, I think if you could get the boat underneath the six foot port in the back, that would give you 69 feet from the Lake. MR. HUNTZ-No, the boat, I think I said before, I think, it's around seven and a half feet wide. MR. KELLEY-Then I gueøø I'd be confused on how you get two cars and a boat in a 30 foot garage. MR. HUNTZ-Well, Wien you don't have walls, you have a little more space. Actually, here we have four sets of walls, two for the port and two for the garage. Whereas, with 30 feet, you only have two walls in it. So, you've got room to play with. MR. KELLEY-I gueøø the question I would have, then, would be, how sensitive are we to the Lake, that's, I gueøø, Wiere I'm at? The side, I don't know that I have a problem with. I mean, he needs, I think the requirement's 20 feet, right, per side. MR. TURNER-Yes, a minimum of 20 feet, a sum of 50. MR. KELLEY-I mean, I appreciate Lee's comment about a one car garage, but I think, Wten you live out in the country that far, two cars is certainly more desirable than one, that might be a little strong in saying you can only have a one car garage, but I think we've got to come up with whatever the minimum is. MR. CARR-Yes, Jeff, Wiat about what Mr. Huntz has mentioned, that the original plan was to angle it right off the corner of the house. I mean, there's six feet, right there, that he's going to throw it in, but, according to, I believe what your statement is, you don't really care, that six feet was just a number you picked out of the air. 23 - MR. HUNTZ-Well, so that there'd be enough room for a little gate. MR. CARR-Right, but I mean, if we went right to the house and angled it off the house, wa picked up six feet on the side line. MR. KELLEY-Then you're looking at that 10 foot requirement that the garage has to be from the house. Of course, the other argument to that is, wall, gee, if the things attached to the house anyway, then you've got no setback. MRS. EGGLESTON-Right. MR. KELLEY-I mean, I'm not sure why that 10 foot rule is really there. MRS. COLLARD-I've had it explained to me, it's for emergency vehicles. you try to keep 10 feet, don't ask me why, but you keep 10 feet between and the house, the principle structure, in case an emergency vehicle has there, but, if you want to just attach it, then there's no MR. CARR-So, if we have anything less than 10, that shoots that right in So, wa might as well go to nothing. I mean, because you can't put an vehicle through six feet. Normally, the garage to through the foot. emergency MRS. COLLARD-True. MR. CARR-And through a stone gate. MRS. EGGLESTON-But on an attached garage, you have to put a fire wall in. because we had to do it with ours and when the garage is like 10 feet don't need a fire wall, so then it increases the fire potential, that's the reasoning, maybe, behind that. I know, away you probably MR. TURNER-An attached garage will cost you more money, fire insurance wise, than a detached garage. MR. KELLEY-Then we also have those things called water curtains or something. It's a vertical spray thing that will keep the heat from one building from jumping to the other and I'm sure that 10 feet probably has something to do wi th it. I mean, I understand his point about the patio. MR. TURNER-You could still have the patio, but you wouldn't have access to the, you know, you'd have to eliminate the gate. MR. KELLEY-Right. MR. CARR-I'm just wondering which would be better, aesthetically and for all the parties, the neighbors, the Lake. MR. SHEA-I think two major concerns are the shoreline setback and the amount of relief that we would be willing to grant on the side yard setback, because, eventually, that is going to effect the neighbor and I think, probably, the best resolution, if Mr. Huntz could agree to something like this, ~uld be to forego the six foot distance from the house to the garage, attach it, and to go to a 30 foot garage. I think, thereby, minimizing the shoreline setback and, by the same token, you're still only then going to be asking for only two feet of side yard setback, approximately. MR. CARR-That's what I think. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. SHEA-Mr. Huntz, do you understand that? MR. HUNTZ-Yes, I do understand what you're saying. MR. SHEA-It's our responsibility to seek the minimal relief and this particular suggestion, I think, ~uld serve all of the conditions well. MR. TURNER-I think you have to live with the fact that your lot is kind of narrow and the way the house is situated on the lot throws everything out of perspective. MR. HUNTZ-It does, yes. MR. TURNER-And by moving that garage over and attaching that corner to the house, reduces and minimizes the setbacks. 24 '- - MR. CARR-I mean, doesn't that sug~stion go back to what you said your original thought was, anyway. I mean, right next to the house and 30 feet? MR. HUNTZ-Well, yes, and we originally thought that we would have a little room in between. In other words, put a roof at a different angle for the part in between the garage and the house, but then we did away with that when we found out we had to be far away because the room would get too big, ~ didn't need that space, so then we sat on the patio with the little, ~ really kind of like this now that we've done it. We designed a nice little gate, there, that would be attractive, in the center of the house, between the house and the garage. It would look nice. MR. KELLEY-I don't know. We didn't talk to him about the design, but I think it may have a play on why that six foot is desirable and I'd have to ask you the question, this upstairs proposed building, how are you gping to get to it? MR. HUNTZ-It would be an outside entrance. MR. KELLEY-From which location, in that patio area? MR. HUNTZ -Yes. MR. KELLEY-There'd be stair s going up, wi. th a doorway up there or something? MR. H UNTZ - Ye a . MR. KELLEY-And, I gueaa, the other thing is, I don't know this person, but let's say they arrive home by car and they've got to get upstair s. I guess if we put it over and attached it, you'd have to either, ~ll, maybe, locate the stairway or something over on the other side, Which seems like it would be out of the way, or get out in the garage, Wilk through a door, towards the rear of the garage, because if it was next to the building, you couldn't have it until you gpt, maybe, back into the middle of the garage, someplace. The logistics of trying to layout how to get to the second floor by moving it over is starting to become a little mOre complicated. MR. CARR-I don't think so. I mean, all you've got to do is put it towards the door at the back of the garage and go right out and right up the stair s, wouldn't you think? Just have it at the, I guess it's the southeast corner. Have the door at the southeast corner of the garage. MR. HUNTZ-We really weren't thinking about someone coming, my mother and mother-in- law are the people who would use this facility and neither one is able to drive, at this point, they're elderly, and we thought about the entrance being convenient from the house, as opposed to, from the garage, so there would be a stairway, as you're looking at the map, on the right aide of the garage, that would go up, from that point. MR. SHEA-Whether it's attached or at six feet of distance, you could still stairway and entrance on that side. MR. HUNTZ-You could still do that. It would be tight in there. It wouldn't give you as much space, but yes. MR. SHEA-And, in fact, atill have a patio area there, can you not? MR. HUNTZ-Yea. bring the back 30 foot garage. It would be smaller, unlesa we angled the garage more, which might corner even closer to the property line, especially if it was a MR. TURNER-Any further questiona? MR. SHEA-Well, I guess we still do have another question of Mr. Huntz, whether he wanta ua to vote on it as is. MR. TURNER-Yea. Do you want ua to vote on it as is, or would you agree to move the garage over so that that point intersects with that corner of the house? MR. HUNTZ-I really can't predict which one you'd be inclined to vote for, at this point, and it is late in the fall and we'd like to get this garage up for this winter and a delay of a month probably would do away with that possibility, if we didn't get approval, tonight. 25 -- MRS. EGGLESTON-Would you like to table it for a week and come back? MR. CARR-I'll juat aay that, baaed on our poaition that we have to go for minimal relief, aa oppoaed to the aenaitive areaa that we foreaee in thia project, being the Lake and the neighbora aide, we may be leaning toward the project, not aa propoaed, but aa we have talked about, here, and I gueaa our feeling ia, or my feeling ia, would that be acceptable to you, getting rid of that aix feet? MR. HUNTZ-If that waa neceaaary, have it approved aa propoaed, that and we're ready to go with thia. aome problema for ua, but, if we do. Yea, I would agree with that. if it had to be. I would prefer, I think, to would be our firat choice. We've kind of adapted So, to go back and make a change would create have to do that, that' a probably what we would I think thia propoaal would be more attractive. MR. KELLEY-Do you have your plana with you? MR. HUNTZ-I don't have plana, but I do have a drawing. repreaentation. I think I have it, here. Thia ia kind of the aix foot would like. In between the garage and the the houae going up here. I think it would be attractive. It waa juat kind of a juat a drawing of what houae, with the angle, MR. KELLEY-I think what he 'a propoaing ia prettier. MR. TURNER-Yea. I think, if I'm getting the aenae of the Board, either we go with minua the aix feet and put the garage over next to the houae, or we deal with it the way you have it, and I don't think that the Board'a gPing to approve it the way you've got it. MR. HUNTZ-You don't think they're going to approve it the way MR. TURNER-No. That'a juat my own gut feeling. I don't think it'a gPing to fly. My queation to you ia, aa an alternative to your propoaal, will you accept the garage at the corner of the houae? MR. HUNTZ-Yea. MR. TURNER-Okay. MR. HUNTZ-If we need to do that, ~ would accept that. MR. TURNER-Okay. MR. HUNTZ-And then it can go out 30 feet, ia that MR. TURNER-Well, we'll aee. We haven't arrived at that, yet. MR. CARR-Ted, I'd make a motion. ItOTION TO GRANT ROJSElIT J. & GAIL IlUNTZ TWO ADA VARIANCES AND DENY THIll ONE AREA VAlIANCE, Introduced by Bruce Carr who moved for ita adoption, aeconded by Jeffrey Kelley: The firat Area Variance granted ia for the requirement of a 10 foot diatance between buildinga and variance given would be for 10 feet. The aecond variance ia a variance from the 20 foot aide line aetback and that Area Variance would be for a diatance of two feet. The variance being denied ia from the ahoreline aetback. Applicant haa demonatrated practical difficulty by the location of the exiating houae, in relation to lot aize. Theae variancea would not. be detrimental to the Ordinance nor are they the minimal relief neceaaary. Duly adopted thia 19th day of September, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Kelley, Mr. Carr, Mr. Shea, Mra. Eggleaton, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mra. Goetz MRS. COLLARD-Explain the 10 foot variance between buildinga. MR. CARR-It'a a 10 foot variance. MRS. COLLARD-He'a required to have 10 feet. 26 --- MR. CARR-Ye$, and he's got a variance of 10 feet. MR. SHEA-So, he could go to zero. He can attach it. MR. TURNER-He can attach it. MRS. YORK-Oh, he's going to attach it. He doesn't need a variance if he's going to attach it. MRS. COLLARD-He doesn't need a variance if you're going to attach it. MR. TURNER-Just the corner? MRS. COLLARD-It's just if you're going to keep the two separate, you need 10 feet. If you're going to attach it, you don't need anything. MR. CARR-But, it's not attached. MRS. EGGLESTON-Fully attached. It's only attached at the corner. MR. TURNER-It's going to stand on it's own, but it'$ not going to directly adjoin it. MRS. COLLARD-Thank you. AREA VARIANCE NO.. 66-1990 nPJh uu.ISTED œ-l0 RITA WLFE OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE Lor 13. NOUR OF L1NN AVllRœ FOR. CONSTR.UCTION OF A SINGLE FAMD.y DtiELLINC.. UQTl/ESTING HELl" FIOM TO. IIlOAD FJlONTAGE AND IEQ"Q1J[BMIIN'I'.. (¡iJUUŒN ooæn PLANNING) TAX HAP NO.. 111-1-13 Lor SIZE: 50 n.. BY 150 n.. SECrrON1..077 PAT TAYLOR, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. CARR-Miss Taylor, may I ask, on the tax map submitted, is Lot 12, mere it looks like a modular, blue home is, so this is this Lot 13 is beyond the end of the road? MS. TAYLOR-It's gPing to be, yes. The road ends at Lot 12. MR. CARR-And one of the things the Staff ha$ brought up is the need for an easement over this paper road that was never dedicated to the Town. Do you know who owns that? MS. TAYLOR-No, I don't. MS. CORPUS-Bruce, if I might interject for a second. It looks like, according to the Assessors Office, the Town owns it and I don't know where the Assessor got their information from, that would take some investigating, as to why that's so and, apparently, the Highway Department did go out and measure, and our right-of-way ends at the pavement. From the deed, my legal opinion is, perhaps, moever deeded the road to the Town, in the first place, might have some interest in that particular piece of property, still, that might help you out. MS. TAYLOR-Okay, that's something I need to know, ~o deeded the road. MS. CORPUS-They have that record in either the Town Clerk Or the Highway Department. MS. TAYLOR-Okay. MS. CORPUS-But the Assessors Office believes the Town owns it. MR. cARR-So, are they going to go back and asse$S taxes to that person who supposedly deeded it over? MS. CORPUS-Perhaps. MR. cARR-These look like subdivision lots. MS. CORPUS-They're preapproved subdivision lots on an existing subdivision map and, apparently, the Staff has determined that a variance from Section 280 A is not required because that does have an exception for lots on filed and approved subdivision maps. Am I correct? 27 --- -- MRS. COLLARD- Yes. MR. CARR-This is an Urban Residential 10,000 zone? MR. TURNER-Yes, UR-10. MR. CARR-How big is the lot size? MR. KELLEY-Seventy five hundred. MR. CARR-Seventy five hundred, so it's MRS. EGGLESTON-Fifty by one hundred fifty. MR. CARR-Does it run into the problem of the two year interpretation that we did for approved subdivisions? MRS. COLLARD-It's not a contiguous, it's a preexisting, nonconforming. It's not contiguous to any of the lots. MR. CARR-Okay, that are not owned by the same owner? MS. CORPUS-It's in separate ownership. MRS. COLLARD-Separate ownership, right. MR. CARR-Okay. MR. KELLEY-The lot beyond your lot. MS. TAYLOR-Number 14? MR. KELLEY- Yes. Is there a building on that? MS. TAYLOR-No. MR. KELLEY-I didn't get around to that side of it, anyway. MS . TAYLOR-No, that's also vacant and undeveloped and so is, okay, I guess 14 is a double lot there, apparently. MR. TURNER-Yes. MS. TAYLOR-It's vacant. MR. KELLEY-Does this Lynn Avenue, if you could drive through there, is that other street, Or proposed street, in existence? There's no name on it. MS. TAYLOR-No. MR. KELLEY-What's called Number 36. RON DUFOUR MR. DUFOUR-11m Ron Dufour. I bought two lots down at the end of the street, okay, and that Rainbow Avenue was sold. It was sold to some guy down on the Boulevard, 30 Boulevard, Harpinger bought it. MR. KELLEY-That's what that, the 36 on the Tax Map or whatever. supposedly, Rainbow Avenue? This is, MR. DUFOUR-Yes, Rainbow Avenue. MS. CORPUS -Mr. Kelley, Wlat might have happened is, on the filed and approved subdivision map, there may be what's called a paper street and, unless that's deeded over to the Town, someone could, possibly, buy it and it looks like it's, it is assessed to an individual. Itls a paper street that's never been opened. MR. KELLEY-Okay, so the feasibility of someone trying to build on Lot 14, they would have to come through this Lynn Avenue, mOre than likely, then. 28 '- MS. CORPUS-Probably, there also might be the opportunity to i3peak to the Highway Department about extending their right-of-way, eventually, if the original owner ii3 found, of that. MR. TURNER-Thii3 has come up in other variances down there. This same thing, same street and everything. MR. DUFOUR-I checked with Mr. Naylor and he i3aid to go over to the Planning Department and they might have something on record, if it was ever deeded over or not, to the Town. Now, I mean, the thing surveyed out, like she had here lot surveyed and mine are surveyed and it i3hows the 50 foot right-of-way down through there. MS. CORPUS-That's probably what was proposed on the original map. In the Town, ei ther the Town Clerk Or the Hi ghway Department, apparently, they have a deed and they have a measurement that they measured what wai3 deeded to the Town, originally, and if falls short, for some reason, of that full length. MR. DUFOUR-But I mean, now, \\hat happens to the people that own from there back. I mean, are they land locked? MS. CORPUS-Yes. MR. DUFOUR-They are land locked? MS. CORPUS-This is a very go od case for hardship, in this particular circumstance, based on what could've been an inadvertent error in a deed. I'm not sure. I haven't reviewed that, but it obvioui3ly was intended to be a road. It was, for some reai3on, jUi3t not made a public road and definitely shows hardship, in that ca se . MR. DUFOUR-Alright, so, then, \\hat would happen to, \\ho would be responsible for the road, at this point? Would it be the property owners? MS. CORPUS-That would be something I would sug~st that you, I would speak to the Highway Department, the Assessors Office, as to why the Assessors Office believes that the right-of-way extends all the way there because no one'i3 paying taxes on it, it's assessed to the Town, ~ere they get their information. They have cardi3 that may go back and have some information in them, in the Town Clerks records, too. MR. TURNER-Any further questioni3? None? Okay. I'll now open the public hearing. P1DBLIC BEARINÇ OP_IID NO OOMM_T P1DBLIC BEARIBÇ a..OSED OOJUŒSPONDINCE Warren County Planning Board returned No County Impact STAFF INP. Notes from Stuart G. Baker, ASi3istant Planner (attached) MR. TURNER-Okay, motion'i3 in order !!lOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE BO. 66-1990 RITA WOLFE, Introduced by Jeffrey Kelley who moved for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard: I feel the applicant does have a special circunatance, here, and that is that the lot is a preexisting lot, as ahown on subdivision map. However, it does not front on a Town road and to deny this applicant would deprive owner of reasonable use of property. Thii3 variance would not be detrimental to the purpose of the Ordinance and public facilities and services would not be adversely effected. This is the minimum relief necesi3ary to alleviate the practical difficulty. Short EAF shows no negative impact. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Carr, Mr. Shea, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Turner 29 '--- NOES í NONE ABSENT: Mrs. Goetz AIIII'A VARlABa: NO.. 67-1990 T1PE II VR.-IA IIEIIE MOBGAII O1IfER: SAME AS ABOV'E '10 JlEMOV'E EXIstING ROUSE ABD B1DlLD A ONE F AMIL '!' RotJISII.. REQœSTING IELIEF FJl(It SIDE )AID SE1'BAQ( BQUIlIMø'l'S.. <aRREN COUITY PLANNING) TAX !lAP NO.. 44-2-25 LOT SIZE. 0..247 AQtES SEClIQN 4.020 D IRENE MORGAN, P.RESENT MR. TURNER-Mrs. Morgan, is that the little white camp? MS. MORGAN-yes, little. MR. TURNER-You can build on that footprint, you know, without being here. MS. MORGAN-If you want to live in 576 foot. MR. TURNER-Yes, but I'm saying, that is an option, 28 by 48. You can go up. MS. MORGAN-I'd like to build on one floor. I want to build a one family, two bedroom, two bath, on just one floor. Just for myself. A retirement home. MR. TURNER-Forty nine in the front, that's a small lot. MRS. EGGLESTON-It is small. MR. TURNER-There's a couple of nice houses right to the east of that and then there's another camp that sits way back in, at the end of it, the Grey camp. Any questions? MR. CARR-Ms. Morgan, you have the setbacks off the deck, at one aide are 14 feet and the other side is 16 feet, is that correct? MS. MORGAN-yes. MR. CARR-Okay, does that jive with the Staff Input? MR. TURNER-That's 30. MR. CARR-That's 30, total. MR. TURNER-And 28. That's 58 feet. MR. CARR-What's 58 feet? MR. TURNER-If the house is 28 feet wide and you've got 14 and 16 is 30 and 28. MS. MORGAN-Right, it's about 58 feet, at that point. MR. CARR-That doesn't really make sense because it says 49.8 at the top. MR. TURNER-It's tapered. MR. CARR-At that point, right. So, I guess, I'm looking at the Staff Input and they said, "Setbacks requested are 8 feet. .from the southeast". MS. MORGAN-I have those little patio or little porch on the side. MR. TURNER-On the side. MR. CARR-Okay. Now I've got it. MR. TURNER-Do you have a plan on the house? MS. MORGAN-I have something, but it's not, I haven't had the plans drawn up. MR. KELLEY-So, these little porches are really like little decks? MS. MORGAN-I'm not sure that this is what I'm going to do because I haven't got my final plans and I was going to make sliding glass doors. 30 ~ MR. KELLEY-But I think these little deck thingfJ are, probably, the biggest part of the problem. MS. MORGAN- Yes. MR. TURNER-Well, the other thing, too, is, Jeff, she doesn't have a final plan. If she's not going to go with this, then we can't really address the application until she comes in with something concrete, afJ to what the setbacks are going to be. MS. MORGAN-Well, if you can take my decks off, then you can go that way. MR. TURNER-That's up to you, if you want to take them off. MR. KELLEY-But a 28 by 48 house MRS. EGGLESTON-You'd have to build within those dimensions. MR. TURNER-You'd have to build within that dimension. to be? Let's see, 4, 5? What's the decks going MR. KELLEY-Well, they're like 7 feet. MR. TURNER-Seven feet wide? MRS. EGGLESTON-Six, fifteen, and then take nine and one is six and one is MR. TURNER-Okay, seven. Yes, you could come out and come this way. MR. CARR-What would the purposefJ of those porches be? MR. TURNER-She proposed to put a glass door on the back there, on the east side, or on the south side. Her proposal, now, is to eliminate those decks. MR. CARR-The side? MR. TURNER-Those decks, yes. MR. CARR-Then just keep the nice front deck. MR. TURNER-Then just keep the MR. KELLEY-Yes, if you just went with the 28 by 48, you're going to gain a whole bunch of side yard and, yet, you've fJti11 got the square footage of the house that would be nice to live in. MS. MORGAN-That's why I haven't any permanent plans because, I don't know what, When I know what you'll allow, then I'll have some. MR. TURNER-But then your septic system, that'll have to be totally updated because you're going from seasonal to year round, now, right? MS. MORGAN-This whole thing is going to be, it is taken out. The septic system, as it is will be eliminated. MR. TURNER-Yes, but you're going back here with it. MS. MORGAN-Right. MR. CARR-Yes, so that's just a new system. With the new house, comes the new system. MS. MORGAN-That's one reason for raising the ground level, to alleviate pumping up hill for a septic system. It's just demolishing what is there and clearing the property. Raising the ground level and starting allover with a new building, new septic. MR. KELLEY-I'd almost rather see her have the actual plan worked out. MR. TURNER-Yes, I would, too. MR. KELLEY-Because you might come back with something 26 feet wide or MR. TURNER-Yes. 31 -- MS. MORGAN-I wanted to get eomething from you, eo that I know that what I can have eomething deeigned to thoee dimendone becauee I live in North Carolina, right now and I'm running back and forth for meetinge and I can have the bui1dinge etarted thie fall. They told me they could put the baeement in. MR. TURNER-You're going to have a full baeement under the houee? MS. MORGAN-Yee. I want to put a garage under the houee. MR. TURNER-From the front? MS. MORGAN-Yee. So, if I don't get a variance now, then I may ae well wait until epring. MR. TURNER-It' e tough to give you a variance becauee the eize of the houee could change and then it'e going to change all the dimeneione. MR. CARR-But I think our variancee are juet, I mean, it eeeme to me, like, ehe' e propodng a 16 from one eide and a 14 from another and, I mean, if that' e the Area Variance that'e eventually granted, ehe hae to work within that. MS. MORGAN-Right, that' e what I would like h for you to MR. CARR-I don't know, it juet eeeme like our decieion ie whether, assuming that the porches are gone, first, for decorative purposes. MS. MORGAN-Yes, okay. MR. CARR-But, that ehe' s proposing 14 at that spot, and, I mean, this this is what has to be worked with. fine. a 28 foot house, 28 foot wide house, and 16, is what's being proposed and if it's granted, I mean, if she makes a narrower house, that's MR. TURNER-That's better. MR. CARR-Yes, that's better. She can never go wider and we've set the minimal that we would accept. She's asking for a 1300 square foot house or something. MS. MORGAN-Well, I'd like to have it 28 foot wide. MR. CARR-Yes, ~11, okay. To me, I don't know if we have to actually see an actual drawing of a house 28 foot wide and the floor plan and where it's going to be. I mean, she'a put it where it's going to be. MR. SICARD-Not to exceed those measurements. MR. CARR-Right, and if she's willing to live wi thin the stipulations that we put here, that thie is what it's got to look like and this is the minimum, I mean, I don't have to see what type of house it's going to be. MR. TURNER-No, I don't either. MR. KELLEY-No, because you could build it 24 foot wide and have a four foot deck so you could have all the patio doors opened up and you could walk forward to the front deck. MR. CARR-Right. MR. TURNER-Yes. heari ng. Okay, any further questions? None? I'll now open the pub lic PTlDBLIC REARJNG OPIlØIJ2) MRS. NETO MRS. NETO-Neto, and we favor the application. MR. TURNER-And where do you live, Mrs. Neto? MRS. NETO-Right across the street from her. MR. TURNER-Okay, thank you. 32 -.-' PUllBLI~ BEARING a.OSJID (OORBESPOBDlIBa Warren County County Planning Board returned No County Impact STAFF INPm Notes by Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner (attached) Letter from attorney Mark Schachner, Re: Variance application of Irene Morgan This letter is submitted on behalf of myself and Margaret Wallace, both of whom reside on Reardon Road as neighbors of Irene Morgan and both of whom are unable to attend the Zoning Board of Appeals hearing on Wednesday night, September 19th. This letter is submitted in support of Ms. Morgan's Variance application. It is our understanding that Ms. Morgan seeks to remove the existing structure from the lot and replace it with a new, year round, single family residence. The lot is very small and it appears that a reasonably sized residence will have to encroach, slightly, upon the side yard setback requirements imposed by the Zoning Ordinance. The existing structure is too amall to reasonably be expected to function as an adequate, year round, single family residence. In addition, the existing structure is not very attractive and not in very good shape. It appears that the plans for the new residence are reasonable, appropriate and will only serve to enhance the neighborhood. The variance appears to be fairly minimal and, as a result, ~ support the request and urge that the variance be granted. MR. TURNER-I have one question, Ms. Morgan. How long have you owned the property? MS. MORGAN-Since June. MR. TURNER-This year? MS. MORGAN-June, this year. One thing I'd like to speak to is, when they said about the shoreline, cluttering the shoreline, 11m acro ss the road from, and I'm setting it back 54 feet. MR. TURNER-Yes, but you're still within the Water Front Residential zone. You're in that zone. MS. MORGAN-I'm trying to eliminate a cluttered look, is one reason I'm setting it back further. MR. KELLEY-I guess I'd like to addresa Bruce for a minute. Bruce, I understand where you're coming from. You're saying if you do a 28 by 48 and you limit her to that, you've set the limits and I do believe she has a practical difficulty, because it says that you can't even build something there and meet all the setbacks. So, there's no question in my mind there's a practical difficulty. I guess the hang up that I have is that, to say, okay, we're going to give you 28 by 48, in my own mind, I cannot consciously say that we have granted what we would call minimum relief. Minimum relief, to me, maybe, would be a 24 foot by 48 foot house. It's certainly a buildable, livable house and we're just saying, yes, we'll give you this. You can design whatever you can to fit wi thin that and I don't know how you can say that that's minimum relief. I'd rather see her come, this is personally, wi. th a plan and if it was 28 feet and there were no other feasib Ie alternatives to make it amaller, I'd say, gee, she did the best she could and I'm happy with that, but just to give it a blanket and say, well, that's got to be the smallest you can do, I don't agree with. MR. CARR-Well, I think the applicant has left it up to the Board to determine what the minimal relief necessary is. She has stated that she feels a 28 foot wide home is minimal to her. The Board may determine that a 24 foot wide home by 48 is plenty of living apace for somebody in retirement. So, I think we can establish what we feel are the minimums and she's indicated that she'll work within what we established and that the weighing, to her, is that she doesn't want to have to come up from North Carolina every couple of months, to present us with a plan to see if we like this particular look of this house or this size, only to be told, ~ll, no, ~ think you can make it smaller. She's willing, as I understand it, for us to tell her, right now, how wide a home we think is minimal for her to live there. She said to us she thinks 28 feet is and I think our decision is to say, no, you can go smaller, like with Mr. Huntz, these are the variances we will give you and you can work wi thin that. It just seems to me, maybe it's something that we should actually see a plan for, but there seems to be some special 33 -' circumstancess heres due to the proximity of Where she livess as tos maybes that's Why she's willing to accept What we would give her. To me s I don't think a 28 by 48 foot home s once you take off the porches and remove the deck s that's only about a 1500 square foot home or 1300s something like that. Thats to mes is not a real large home. MR. KELLEY-No, but I've seen a lot of people come in here and we've told thems gee s can you s and garages in particular swell s houses s too s and we said, could you do thiss could you do that and they made compromises and we, ultimatelys ended up with what we felt was the minimum and I'm just sayings I don't think that does it. MR. CARR-Right swell s we've done a compromise shere. She said she I s gotten rid of the porches as decorative s that gets rid of 192 plus 8 feet off the side yard setback. SOs I think, nos we don't have a specific plan, heres other than a drawing that she has presented to us. I've always had a wonder whether we have the right to look at floor planss the inside, interior of buildings. I've always had questions as to whether the zoning has that right to look at this floor plans but that's another issue. MRS. EGGLESTON-Well s my thoughts are that we've always insisted that people come in here with an alternative and a layout of their plans and would we be setting some sort of a precedent, heres tonights by accepting this and thens in the futures are we just going to says when people come before us swell s you haven't got your plans with yous but s we'll give you approval to build a 30 by 40 and you just stay within those dimensions. It's something we haven't done in the past and are we opening the door to do something different, here. MR. KELLEY-I agree. MR. CARR-I think there are extremely special circumstancess here. Somebody living four states away. I means it's not that they can come here every month. MR. TURNER-She's got to come for a Site Plan Reviews anyway. MR. KELLEY-That's her problems not ours. We're the Zoning Board. We're the guys that the Town has bestowed upon us to look after things for them. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes. MR. KELLEY-Because she lives in North Carolinas I can't help it. We had people here from England who wanted to build a dome homes I mean, what do you w-ant me to do about it? MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. CARR-Well, I just don't see a problem with saying that a 28 ft. by 48 ft. home is a minimal home and the relief requested is minimum. I mean, I don't have a problem with that. MRS. EGGLESTON-Wells I guess I'm going to says you could build an igloo, 28 by 48, does that mean you'd want it there? MR. CARR-Do we have the right to say no? Do we have the right to say no because of designs? MR. KELLEY-No. MRS. EGGLESTON-Nos buts I means something really obtrusive or that sticks out. MR. CARR-But we have no right tos we don't have the right to discuss design. MR. KELLEY-Alrights let me ask you this thens okay? Here's the Whole crux. Tell me why she couldn I t go with 24 foot wide house s or leu or let her tell me Why she couldn't build a 24 foot wide house? MR. CARR-That's fine. I agree. MR. KELLEY-Ms. Irene Morgans could you tell me Why you cannot build a 24 foot house or a 22 foot wide house or come up with some other proposal s other than 28? 34 --- '----" MR. SICARD-Because she wants a 28 foot. MRS. EGGLESTON-There's that little word again, "want". MS. MORGAN-I want to have decent sized It's going to be a permanent house. to have something large enough to put just like to have something that's at by 14 or something, for a bedroom. rooms because I'm going to be living there. I don't want a 9 by 9 bedroom. I've got a double bed in, Or a Queen size, and I'd least 12 or, you know, if you've got a 12 MR. KELLEY-12 and 12 is 24. MS. MORGAN-I live in a 3,000 square foot home in North Carolina. MRS. EGGLESTON-When do you plan on moving up here? MS. MORGAN-As soon as I can get the house built. MR. TURNER-What size house did you say you lived in? MS. MORGAN-3,000 sq. ft. MR. TURNER-3,000 sq. ft. MS. MORGAN-That might be why I'm having a little difficulty. MR. TURNER-Yes. MS. MORGAN-But this is about less than half the size of what I'm MR. TURNER-Yes, but I agree with Mr. Kelley. You haven't offered us anything. You said we need a 28 by 49 foot house and we'll take the porches off, but you can go up to. MS. MORGAN-Thank you. MR. TURNER-No, I mean you can go up with your house, as well as MS. MORGAN-But I would like to stay on one floor. MR. TURNER-Yes, but it's dictated by the size of your lot, too. MR. SHEA-I don't think it's the Board's intent to limit, Or down size the size of anyone's home because of their own personal requirements, with regards to the living space is a very personal matter, but I do think it is our responsibility to mitigate the side yard setbacks. I mean, you're working with a very small lot and that, really, is the major issue, here. Not really the size of the house, but the amount of variance that you're asking for because it's our duty and responsibility to make sure that it is the minimal relief that could be granted. So, it really has, it may sound like and seem like we're asking you to live in a smaller home than what you desire, but that is really not the case and, due to that fact, I think that if you were to give the actual size of the home more thought and put it into a formal plan that does show intent and a willingness, on your part, to minimize the side yard setbacks, then the Board can act on it in good faith and, probably, mOre expeditiously. MR. CARR-I've got one more thing to say. We granted a 720 foot garage without seeing the proposal for that, tonight. All we did was draw it on the map and we gave it to him because we were able to make a determination whether a 720 foot garage was enough for a boat and two cars. Now, she's asking us to make a determination of what is enough for a person to live in and her proposal is a 28 by 48, but the deck is, the house is 1344 square feet. I mean, is that a livable house? MR. KELLEY-I think when you have a lot that's one fifth of what the zone is, that's a real small lot and I think, When you own a lot like that, you owe it to whoever because you bought it, to try to do the best you can to conform. MR. CARR-She goes to an architect and comes back with a 28 by 48 foot house, What's our decision going to be? She's going to have a drawing. I guess, are we going to hear more testimony? Is somebody going to come in and say, this is the minimal house necessary for a single person? I assume you're single. I just don't understand what's to be gained by her actually getting a drawing. She's given us a drawing. 35 '--' -.../ MR. TURNER-She hasn't. MR. KELLEY-Because I'm going to feel that I did my job well and that's to grant minimal relief and I don't feel I'm doing that, now. MR. TURNER-Bruce, she hasn't given us the drawing, that's not the drawing she's going to use. MR. SICARD-Cbuld I ask what size the existing house is, that you intend to remove? MS. MORGAN-It's 16 feet wide and 30 feet long. MR. SICARD-How many square feet is that? MR. KELLEY-576. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes, 576 square feet. MR. SHEA-I think that, unless you're vehemently opposed to a two story house, the best resolution to this would be to reduce the size of the proposed house from 28 feet by 48 feet to something smaller than that and that would, I'm sure, take care of Mr. Kelley's responsibilities at seeking minimal relief and then going two stories to give you additional living space and that way you'll have what you need, that's generally how these things work. MR. KELLEY-To say you don't want a bedroom smaller, with the minimum dimensions smaller than 12 feet, fine. There's ways to design that. You can have a 20 foot wide bedroom. The house may end up being 50 feet long, but I don't have a problem with 50 feet long. I think there's alternatives and I think there's probably numerous ways to come up with something that may grant us mOre relief and you're still going to be happy. You're still going to be on one floor. You're going to have your garage underneath. I just don't think other avenues have been explored. MR. CARR-But then are we asking her to come in with four different plans, but then we ask her to submit one. We only vote on one. MR. KELLEY-We're asking her to submit a plan that has been looked at and thought about and presented to us as being the best alternative. MR. CARR-By whom, that's what I'm asking? MR. KELLEY-I don't care. Whoever she wants to hire. MR. CARR-Why does she have to hire somebody? MR. KELLEY-Unless she wants to draw it herself. MRS. EGGLESTON-Bruce, isn't this somewhat of a self-imposed hardship, since the property was just purchased in June and when she bought it, the dimensions of the property? as well, she knew MR. CARR-That's very possible. MRS. EGGLESTON-And this is a self-imposed hardship. MR. CARR-Well, that's a whole other issue. MR. KELLEY-Cbuld I ask her, \\Ìlat's your credentials as an architect? Are you capable of designing this house and can you give us founded information as to why this is what you have to have? MS. MORGAN-I'm not an architect, no. MR. KELLEY-Okay, that's all you need to say. MR. CARR-Then we better ask that of every applicant their architects and why aren't they here testifying. point, but MR. TURNER-I understand your point, but, and then she says, the next breath she So, that's not the layout of the house. that comes in is, \\bo are I mean, I can see you're also, she comes in, here's the plan, says, that's not the one that I want. So, ~ don't know what it is. So, ~'re 36 '-' - soul searching, here, trying to find out what the size of the house is. We don't even know what she's decided on, yet, so how can we give her relief? MR. SICARD-Well, if you have the outside dimensions. MR. TURNER-Charlie, she doesn't have them. MR. CARR-She does. She's got a 28 by 48 foot house. MS. MORGAN-28 by 48. MR. SICARD-28 by 48. MR. KELLEY-Does the house have an overhang, a roof overhang? Because it's measured from the furthest extreme of the house. MR. TURNER-It's measured from the overhang. MR. KELLEY-So, you're telling me you've got a four foot overhang and you've got a 20 foot house. MS. MORGAN-If you give me 28 by 48, I'll see that an architect builds within those dimensions, that he'll design it within those dimensions. MR. SICARD-Including the overhang? MS. MORGAN-Including the overhang, right. MR. TURNER-But then, again, in the second time around, you're not saying to us that you could adapt to a 24 foot wide house. You're not giving us any alternative. You're coming to us and saying, here, I've got a 28 foot house, 49 feet long that I want, period. MR. CARR-But no one ever gives us alternatives. They always come in with one alternative. MRS. EGGLESTON-But we send them back for alternatives. MR. TURNER-We send them back. MRS. EGGLESTON - We don't always buy it. MR. KELLEY-We send them back a lot of times. MRS. EGGLESTON-We say, go back to the drawing board and try to make the relief less, mOre minimal. MS. MORGAN-Do you want me to come in with a plan for different sized houses? MR. TURNER-I guess my problem, and I've got to go back to what Joyce said, my problem is, that she just bought the property in June 1990. She knew what she bought. If she wasn't aware of the zoning, she should have found out when she bought it. MR. CARR-That I don't have any argument with, but MR. SICARD-I think all of us could live in a 24 by 24 foot house if we had to, if we didn't have the money to build a 28 foot house. MR. TURNER-Yes, What would you do. MR. SICARD-But just to satisfy the minimal requirement, ~'ve got to go down to 24 feet. If somebody's got the money to go 28, I don't know why they can't. There's a lot of houses around here that are a lot more than 28. MR. TURNER-That might be, Charlie, but they're not on a lot that narrow. MR. SICARD-I mean, ~'re still in America. MR. TURNER-You've got less than a 50 foot frontage on the road. MR. SICARD-To stay wi thin the confines of 28 by 48 would seem to me that it fits into our requirements. 37 -- MRS. EGGLESTON-Charlie, you of all people, know how Glen Lake is ao congeated. I would think your heart would be, at aome point in time, to aay, you have to limit aome of the aize. I mean, it' a nice to want it, but when you juat bought that property and you know the aize of it and, undoubtedly, I would aay, thia women knew, Wlen ahe bought it, What the limitationa were. Then, if it' a not big enough for you, don't buy it. Buy aome place where you can put something to meet your needs. MR. SICARD-To verify What you juat aaid, the beauty of the area, ~'re all interested in it. We're all interested in getting that piece of property, that building, in there, out of there and building a new building that's much more attractive, alao, Which we have to deal into our thinking, I would think because there's a here'a a new building with a new aeptic aystem and so forth and I think that any of ua that are living in that area want to see thia type of thing happen. I'm aure I do becauae there are a lot of buildinga up there, and I don't want to call them ahacks, but they could be replaced. MR. TURNER-I think we've diacusaed it enough. Ma. Morgan, WJuld you consider tabling thia application so you could preaent Ua with a proper plan? MS. MORGAN-Do you want me to go to an architect and get a p Ian for a 28 by 48 houae? MR. TURNER-You've got to provide us with an alternative. Maybe, ~ won't accept the 28. Bring the 28 if you like, but it might not gP. MR. KELLEY-What I would like you to do, I'm not saying an architect, per se, it can be a planner, there are other people who don't necesaarily have architects degreea, that know how to deaign a houae to fit this lot and who, if you give them the ground rules of the Zoning Ordinance for this particular zone and you went to them and aaid, I need a houae that has two bedrooma, three bedrooms. You tell them what you want for rooms, okay, you say, but it haa to come as close as it can, Or try to meet the aetback requirements. Let that be their design criteria, then, if they know what they're doing, they should be able to come up with a feasible houae that makes you happy and alao, I would say, probably, WJuld make the Zoning Board happy, but there are no guarantees. MS. MORGAN-When I purchased the property, I bought it as a camp, but I liked the area and I've been able to aell my houae in NOrth Carolina, and so I decided I would like to live there permanently. I wanted to make a permanent home there, so I wanted something that'a a reaaonable size. If I can't build a houae that's a reaaonable size, I won't build any at all, that'a all. 1111 just look elsewhere. MR. KELLEY-I understand. It would be great to have you move here. We I d love to have you. I think you're a nice lady, but I think you have to look at what the zoning requirements are, for the area and you have to present to us your best caae. MR. TURNER-You have to try to minimize the impact on those side yard setbacks. MS. MORGAN-Even though there' a houses in the area that are built right up to the li ne ? MR. TURNER-Those probably preexiated. table it, bring it back with a plan? Is it your position then, you'd like to MS. MORGAN-Can you vote on this? MR. TURNER-We'll vote on the tabling, if that'a your request. MS. MORGAN-Well, if you vote on the 28 by 48, and then if you vote it down, then I can come back anyway, right? MR. TURNER-With a new plan. MS. MORGAN-Yes, I'd have to come back with a new plan. MR. KELLEY-She'd have to re-file, too. MR. TURNER-Yea, you'd have to pay again, to re-file. 38 ~ MR. KELLEY-You'd have to pay another $50. MR. TURNER-We're giving you the option to go and get another plan. MR. KELLEY-Well, unless it passes. MR. CARR-Ms. Morgan, I would sug~st you table it. MR. TURNER-This way, here, it'll give you a chance to work up another plan, an alternative to what you have, minimizing the side yard setbacks, and come back without paying another fee. MR. KELLEY-And, maybe having to wait two or three meetings. It depends on how busy they are. MS. MORGAN-Okay, so we table until spring, is that it? MR. CARR-No, you can table it until you have the plans that you want to present, ready. MR. TURNER-Can you get the plans back by next month? Then we'll put you on the agenda. MS. MORGAN-I can't come back next month. MR. CARR-Well, Wienever you can come back. houae represent you as your agent. You could have whoever designs the MR. KELLEy-yea, you could have someone represent you, if you wanted to do that. MR. SHEA-The Board is interested in seeing the properties up dated there, but I think, tonight, you found out that the sensitivity is probably more so, on this particular lot becauae of its size, so it was certainly not an evening that went for naught. I mean, all that we're asking for is that we have a concrete proposal and plan that we can rule on, that shows and demonstrates the sensitivity of the size of the lot and I think you'll be able to do that. MR. TURNER-Submit it at you're convenience. MS. MORGAN-Well, I guess we table it and just see me again. MRS. EGGLESTON-Think about the second story and you really could have a lot of space and room and still keep the size down, somewhat. MR. TURNER-You might come up with a lot better plan than what you showed, here, and maximize more of the lot for green space, alright. MS. MORGAN-Whatever we must do. MR. TURNER-You want to table it? MS. MORGAN-Yes, you may as well. BO'lIOB TO TABLE ADA VAIUABCE BO. 67-1990 IBENE IIORGAB, Introduced by Theodore Turner Who moved for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard: Request by applicant to table for further information as to an alternate plan for the house. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shea, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Turner NOES: Mr. Carr ABSENT: Mrs. Goetz 39 --- USE VAJUANat NO. 68-1990 'riPŒ: TQIILISTED :rørc:-lA JAMES M. WELLD, P.E. OWND.: JŒ mom-In BJErWEEN mGBLAND AVENUE AND THE BOULJ1VAIID FOR OONSTJIDCTIŒ OF A NEW BmLDING AND œrSIDE STOIAGIJ: F@R OPERA'I'lŒ OF A WBOI.¡sAT.'i; PLIlfBING, IBEA'l'ING, AND INDUSTIIIAL DIS'DlB1IJ'rlœ BœINIISS.. (F..W. WEBB) (WARBR coon PLANNING) 'lAX MAP NO.. 11 0-4-:Jr ..2 LI01l SIZE: 2.24 AaBtS SEealœ 4.020 K JOE ROULIER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TURNER-How long have you owned that, Joe? MR. ROULIER-I've owned the property for, approximately, four year~. MR. CARR-Ted, do you remember what the zoning wa~, before? MR. TURNER-Highway Commercial. MR. ROULIER-It wa~ a Highway Commercial 30. I think that'~ how it wa~ cla~~ified. MR. TURNER-Ye~, it could have been. MR. ROULIER-And then, with the new zoning, it wa~ recla~~ified to Highway Commercial One Acre. MR. CARR-What have your attempt~ been, in the pa~t, to ~ell the property a~ zoned? MR. ROULIER-I have tried, for approximately three year~, to market thi~ property. Initially, I li~ted it with Manor Home~ in Glen~ Fall~. It wa~ li~ted with them for about one year. I've tried, on my own, to ~ell it through adverti~ement~ in the paper and through other bu~ine~~ acquaintance~ that I have inquiring, to find out if they'd be intere~ted. I've even gone ~o far a~ to offer the property, with no down payment, carrying the entire amount my~elf and when I offered that via the paper there wa~n't one re~pon~e. The property, for about the la~t ~ix to nine month~, ha~ been li~ted with Woodland Realty and they, about three month~ ago, obtained the fir~t offer that I've had on the property. MR. CARR-And that wa~ from Webb? MR. ROULIER-That wa~ from F.W. Webb, that'~ correct. MRS. EGGLESTON-We're you a~king the ~ame, con~i~tent price through thi~ whole range of different tactic~? MR. ROULIER-No, I've reduced the price by approximately $45,000 from when I initially put it on the market, to the pre~ent offer. MR. TURNER-Have you offered it for any of the u~e~ allowed in the Highway Commercial zone? MR. ROULIER-I offered it a~ Highway Commercial property and I would a~~ume that anyone intere~ted in the u~e~ would have made the inquiry, if I under~tand your que~tion correctly. MR. TURNER-My only comment, there, would be that, I think Scorentio built a building right next to your lot for a Highway Commercial u~e. MR. ROULIER-Right, it'~ twice removed from my lot. MR. TURNER-Right. MR. CARR-I~ that the, which one i~ that? I~ that the motor, the u~ed car place? MR. TURNER-Ye~, and Holli~ter~, acro~~ the road, that' ~ a preexi~ting, nonconforming. They've been there for a long time and they're not in a whole~ale budne~~. They're in the plumbing/heating. They u~ed to be, partly, in the whole~ale bu~ine~~, along with the plumbing and heating, but they dropped out of that. JAMES WELLER MR. WELLER-They're a con~truction company, which I believe, now, i~ required to be in a Light Indu~trial lA which i~ what they're in. MR. TURNER-Ye~, but I 'm ~aying, they u~ed to ~ell pipe and fitting~ and ~tuff, be~ide~ the con~truction end of it, but they're out of that. 40 -- -- MR. WELLER-They're not nonconforming with they're present use at that location, I don't believe. MR. TURNER-No, they're not, but they're preexisting. MR. ROULIER-For a three year period, I think that I've made every effort possible, listing it with the realtors, two realtors. I know, for a period of time, I don't know exactly the period of time, it was in the multiply listing book, but, for the time that I've had it, like I say, this is the only offer that I've had, not even any comments or inquiries, to the best of my knowledge, have come, regarding the property. MRS. EGGLESTON-Bruce, there is a letter from Woodland Real Estate that will be doing, that'll maybe answer your question. MR. TURNER-I guess the only problem I've got with the proposal is, it is a wholesale business that belongs in a Light Industrial zone. They're wholesale, absolutely. They will not sell retail. You can walk in their store and it's Wlolesale or no sale. They distribute it to contractors mills and so forth, but to private citizens, they do not sell. MR. ROULIER-I can't argue that point with you. MR. TURNER-No, but I can, because I buy stuff from them, once in a while, but I know that for a fact. MR. ROUL IER-We 11 , I think, fundamentally, we have to look at if I've been able to market the property and, in a three year period, certainly, has demonstrated that it hasn't been. MR. TURNER-Well, you've got one year that the market's been right off, completely. MR. ROULIER-But there were two years where it was very good. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. ROULIER-We've seen significant growth in the Queensbury area and, yet, there's been no inquiries into this particular piece of property. MR. TURNER-But, just down the road, Wes Vecey just built a retail business right on Dix Avenue. They cleared the old Riley propert y. Evidently, they're going to do something with that and it's starting to go, down there, but it's starting to go Highway Commercial. MR. ROULIER-But don't you tend to think that that particular property, first of all there's more traffic, but I think that lends itself more to a Highway Commercial than the piece of property that I'm currently marketing. The parcel that I'm marketing is somewhat wedged between two particular zones and there really hasn't been any significant improvement in the area, as you can see, the development on Dix Avenue, the way it's going. You have Wes Vecey that's just built. You had Valenti Construction that's just been built, down by BOCES, and it seems like there's going to be a tremendous growth of Highway Commercial type of businesses down that Avenue. I think we've seen that all the way from Ridge Road, now, out through that and continuing right out to Route 4 and 32, out that way. MR. TURNER-Not to beat an old horse to death, but Scorentio just built that new building, right there, two years ago. So, that's evident, to me, that that area's going to remain Highway Commercial. You've got R & M across the road. You've got his other place across the road. He's got his new place. You've got an autobody shop down the road. You've got boat sales on the corner. You've got a lot of Highway Commercial use right there, even though you haven't been able to move it. Maybe just the size of the lot makes it unpresentable. MR. WELLER-Can I speak to that? Mr. Turner, speaking on behalf of F.W. Webb, I understand they're a wholesale distribution business, but I really think we should think in terms, for just a minute, of two types of wholesale distribution businesses. There are those types of distribution businesses that can be remotely located and the product in their warehouse is distributed to their customers at the location of the customer. Now, Webb does this, for sure, but then there's the type of Wholesale distribution business that needs to be in a readily accessible area, so that their customers can come to them and Webb does a great deal of this 41 '--- --- type of bueineee and F.W. Webb, to conduct their bueine~e, ie looking for where they're readily acceedble and thie ie an ideal location for them, of that uniqueneee of their type of wholeeale dietribution bueineee. cw;>tomere need to come to them and need to be able to acceee them and other way around. a p lace becauee They're not the MR. SHEA-Jim, where are they located, now, in Town? MR. WELLER-They're on Warren Street in Glene Falle, in downtown Glens Falle. MR. SHEA-Okay, and could you, for u~, other than explaining that they have ae many customere coming to them as they dietribute to the cuetomers location, can you describe, in a little greater detail, the kind of operation that will be conducted on site, there? MR. WELLER-Well, generally speaking, it's plumbing and heating contractors. MR. SHEA-What I'm getting at is, other than the building itself, what kinds of materials are going to be outdoors and exposed to the public, things of that sort? MR. WELLER-The outeide storage ie, primarily, for pipe, for metal pipe. The site plan, ae we've submitted it, it'e ecreened etorage. Their cuetomer baee there, at the location, ie primarily plumbing and heating contractore, local plumbing and heating contractors, that come there on a regular baeie, and othere, to purchase and pick up the etock that they have. They do do eome delivery on their own trucks, but not a lot. I think they told ue they had three company vehicles. MR. TURNER-Yes, but if they've got any major etock orders that they have to fill, they take them right out in New Hampshire and bring them right from New Hampshire with their truck, but it gPes through their office, here. MR. WELLER-That's correct, but the etock does not. The materials do not. MR. TURNER-Yee, but they have a lot of stock, there, a lot of stock. They have a lot of pipe and they have a lot of fittinge. They have all kinde of heating equipment, air conditioning unite, furnacee, boilere, everything. They've got a tremendoue lot of etuff. They're a big outfit. MR. WELLER-Yes, they are. MR. TURNER-They're not just located in Glene Falls. Hampshire, Maeeachusetts, allover, Vermont. They're located in New MR. WELLER-That' e correct. 40 etores. They've indicated to us that they have better than MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. WELLER-It'e a large operation. MR. TURNER-That' e my only problem. I think they belong in a Light Induetrial zone. That's why we deeigned a Light Industrial zone, for that kind of an operation. Even though they're plumbing and heating contractore have to come there, they'll still go there if they're there. MR. CARR-But isn't the intention, also, a Uee Variance, to look at the property and the succees of it being marketed as being Highway Commercial and it eeems that there'e been quite a bit of testimony ae to the inability of that. I mean, after three yeare, to have ~ inquiry and it's not even an inquiry for something that would properly fit wi thin the zone. So, really, he hae had no inquiriee for any Highway Commercial and I think eomebody had mentioned it might be becauee of the lot eize and there'e not much you can do about that. What is it, over two acres or eomething, ie that what somebody said? MR. WELLER-There's a lot of uees that would be permitted that would be very difficult to accommodate on thie site. I mentioned in the application, the stormwater management and there ie an exteneive plan to handle stormwater there. There are limited storm sewers. It' e a eide hill piece of property. A great deal of the property is gPing to have to be ueed to retain etormwater on the site. That doesn't work well for parking lots. A Plaza Commercial, which would require substantial parking, could not be accommodated, here. A facility that required a large eeptic dispoeal syetem would probably not be accommodated, here. There's a high groundwater table, 42 ------ there and there's a high rock level. otherwise be permitted, that wouldn't So, there are a lot of uses that might work very well on this particular site. MR. SHEA-I guess I would agree with Jim and I would also think that t he nature of that particular area, although it's zoned Highway Commercial; there are a lot of businesses that simply wouldn't work there and don't want to be there and that's probably a very good reason why Joe has not received an offer in a good length of time. Although it's Light Industry, it just, I understand why that was done, at the time, but I alao do think that the kind of business that goes in there has as much to do with us granting the variance as does the financial hardship of the inability to move the property, as does what it's strictly zoned for and that's one of the reasons I asked the actual nature. I'm somewhat familiar with F.W. Webb and I'm trying to recall exactly where I had seen another one of their locations. It might have been in Rutland, but I do know that they keep their properties very neat and orderly and that's what I was trying to get to. At least it's been my experience in seeing one of their other facilities. MR. KELLEY-I'm just trying to evaluate, in my mind, how, you know, looking at the uses that are permitted in a Highway Commercial lA and looking at what's allowed there and I'm looking at this saying, if you put that in there, what effect would that have on the surrounding neighborhood, let's say, more adverse than some of the other u~es and I don't know that I really see any, I guess. I'm thinking of noise and things of that nature and you can put an amusement center there. You can put automobile repair and body shop, that, I would think, could be kind of noisy. There's a lot of things, we were talking about high traffic and restaurants, sales of numerous kinds of things, mobile homes and boats and cars. I don't know. I think, probably, the noisiest thing, in this thing, might be a tractor trailer backing up and maybe a lift truck running around, but that would be more of a noise pollution thing. MR. SICARD-Less noise than most of the other things. MR. TURNER-It's not a real noise operation, only when you're handling all the material and stuff, that's the only time it becomes noisy. MR. SICARD-And some of those things would generate, just as Jim says, excessive amounts of traffic, so they'd have to have parking lots and put in all kinds of retention areas for stormwater and I don't know if you have the rOom to do all that. What do you plan on doing, as far as stormwater is concerned, retention areas? MR. WELLER-We're actually gping to use the pipe storage area down near the Boulevard as a detention area, that's our plan, and then a slow release to the stormwater, the catch basins, the stormwater system on the Boulevard. MR. KELLEY-Is there a sewer down there? MR. WELLER-Not to my knowledge, no. We have plans for a septic system. MR. KELLEY-I see the water main, gas main, then there was something, I didn't know what it was. MRS. EGGLESTON-I guess where my thoughts are, it's such an unattractive area, I wouldn't want to live there and I wouldn't want to have a business there and, for me, it's kind of hard to be sO darn picky or choosy if somebody does want to put something there that's gping to be productive and bring tax dollars and so what to the area and, as Jeff has said, you could have something in there much more, not to you're liking, such as an amusement center or something that's gping to really make a lot of noise. MR. TURNER-Yes, you could have an automobile sales and service there. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes, I can't see where this really falls so far out of the class of Seeleys retail, Wholesale, Whatever you want to call it, Or Hollisters. MR. KELLEY-You could have a veterinary clinic with barking dogs. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes. MR. WELLER-I think Seeleys actually has a warehouse next to the auction house where they're doing nothing but warehousing. 43 ,- MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes, I believe they do. personal thoughts, is so far out of MR. SHEA-Well, I think there are probably a number of in Highway Commercial and in Light Industry, that could into the other category without anyone knowing about it. I just can't see where this, for my own, described businesses, both very easily be interchanged MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes, I think you're right. MR. SHEA-I mean, to me, they could just as easily be in the other category and I think this particular business falls into this description. It could just as easily be in Highway Commercial and I think that the nature of the area, as is developed, now, w:>u1d be served well for either, depending on the business, but, again, it's my belief that this particular business would not be detrimental to the area if it were re-zoned so that it could be put there and I do think that any other remaining vacant property, there, will become more marketable with greater development in that area. It has been, in my opinion, somewhat unsightly area over the years and I think that new construction going into the area would improve it dramatically. MRS. EGGLESTON-I guess my one other thought would be, if you're hauling these long pipes that are, it takes trailer tractors to haul, and they would be getting off the Northway, would all that be coming through the City of Glens Falls? MR. SHEA-They go through it, now. MR. CARR-They go downtown, now. MR. SICARD-Their existing location is right in the center of the City, right now. MR. SHEA-Right. MR. SICARD-And, also, quite a bit of residential area, Fredella Avenue, for instance, is very residential, Oak Street and everything, right in that vicinity of that circle is pretty residential, along with everything else, and, yet, people would hardly know they're even there. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes. MR. TURNER-You've got to cross the street going in Hollister's lot, a display of modular homes by Dean Hollan, if I read the minutes right. Am I correct, Pat? MRS. COLLARD-They're, possibly. They're not sure they're going through with it. MR. TURNER-They're not done with it yet, are they? MRS. EGGLESTON-Well, this property borders on Highland. MR. WELLER-This property goes from Highland to the Boulevard, that's correct. MRS. EGGLESTON-Highland to the Boulevard, yes. MR. TURNER-No, I mean, it's right in Hollister's lot. MRS. EGGLESTON-In Hollister's lot? On the same side of the MR. TURNER-Across the road, right across the road. MRS. EGGLESTON-From this? MR. TURNER-Yes, that's the proposal. with it. I know they're before the Planning Board MRS. COLLARD-It would be one modular. MR. TURNER-Yes, one. It's a display unit and they're going to sell them out of that. MRS. COLLARD- Ye s . MR. ROULIER-Mr. Turner, it's my understanding, though, that they'll be rotating those modu1ars, that there'll be a display for a certain period of time, and it's his intention, at least in the conversation I've had with him, is that he'll be, every six months or a year, changing the particular display unit. 44 - --- MR. TURNER-Yes, I think you're correct on that. Any other questions of Mr. Weller? None? Okay, I'll open the public hearing. PUBLI~ JlEAtiNG OPENED NANETTE RUSHLOW MRS. RUSHLOW-I'd like to ask a question. four years? Joe, you've owned this property for MR. ROULIER-Approximately, yes. MRS. RUSHLOW-You run the Boulevard Auto Sales? MR. ROULIER-No, I don't own that. MR. TURNER-Could we have your name, please? MRS. RUSHLOW-I'm Nanette Rushlow. I've owned property on One Highland Avenue for 40 years. I live in a residential house. MRS. EGGLESTON-So, what was your question? MRS. RUSHLOW-My question is, I haven't seen a For Sale sign on that property. Have you been dealing through realtors? MR. TURNER-He indicated that he had, maybe this lady could answer that. MARIANNE F ACKLAM MRS. FACKLAM-I'm Marianne Facklam and I work at Woodland Real Estate and the property has been listed with us and we have had a sign there. It is presently there on the property. It states the zoning. It states that it's 2.2 acres. MRS. EGGLESTON-Thank you. MRS. RUSHLOW-My concern is that I will be looking directly at whatever goes there and if they belong in another area, such as up on the County Line Road, or something, with more property to do the work they want to, this 2. parts of an acre is on a diamond shaped piece of land. It doesn't seem feasible for the type of work and tractor trailering and piping and then my other question would be, are there going to be some kind of fencing done with it? Is it all just going to be rolled right out in front of you? Hollisters is very neat. You don't see their equipment. MR. CARR-They have a drawing. Perhaps you'd like to take a look at it. MRS. RUSHLOW-Yes, because I haven't seen anything. MR. WELLER-That drawing has also been enhanced for the si te plan submittal, that drawing that was submitted for zoning does not have all the landscaping and the plantings on it. The drawing has been enhanced for site plan review. MRS. RUSHLOW-Could you tell me exactly what I will be looking at? My porch sits directly across. I live in that duplex white house. I live on 65 foot frontage, there. I feel like I'm being squeezed. MR. TURNER- You live in this one, ri ght here, ri ght ? MR. KELLEY-The one that's on the map? It says Robert Perkins? MR. TURNER-The one that's on the map? MRS. RUSHLOW-Yes. It should be, on One Highland Avenue, yes. MR. KELLEY-He's got the pool in the back yard? MR. ROULIER-Here's Hollisters, here. MR. TURNER-You live next to Hollisters? MR. ROULIER-This is the gold building, right here, down on the corner. Then you're over here. 45 '''"--- - MR. TURNER-She's across the street. MR. WELLER-You're below this. MRS. RUSHLOW-This is the point, like this. MR. ROULIER-This is the point that comes down to the intersection. MRS. RUSHLOW-I'm right here. MR. TURNER-She's the white house across the street, aren't you? MR. WELLER-We're up beyond the Perkins house. MR. ROULIER-That's right. You know the gold building, here, that they do the auto work? It's right across the street from you. MRS. RUSHLOW-Alright, yes, that's on the diamond, between Warren St reet, that used to be the Boulevard Auto? Are you talking about the new building they put up a couple of years ago? MR. ROULIER-The new building, that's right across the street from you? MRS. RUSHLOW-Yes, it is across the street from me. MR. ROULIER-Okay, then there's this white house, this old white house, right here. MRS. RUSHLOW-That's on Warren Street, that's on the Boulevard. MR. ROULIER-That's right. MR. WELLER-That's right, and the pool is visible from Highland. You can drive through Highland, also. MR. TURNER-They can get in any way. MRS. RUSHLOW-This is the Boulevard. This house is on the Boulevard, t hat you're looking at. MR. ROULIER-That's correct. MRS. RUSHLOW- I don't li ve on the Boulevard. used to be the Stonecrest bar on the corner. be hind it. I live on Highland Avenue. There I live in the white house directly MR. TURNER-I know where you live. She lives in the white house right across the road. MR. ROULIER-That's more down in this area, down here. MR. WELLER-We're up the road quite a bit. MR. ROULIER-We're up here. Hollisters comes all the way down to about this point, right here. MRS. RUSHLOW-Then you're not talking about this very corner. MR. ROULIER-No. MR. WELLER-No. You know where the Niagara Mohawk lines run across the road going up Highland, going up to Haviland? MRS. RUSHLOW-Yes. MR. WELLER-We're almost up to the power lines. We're way up the hill. MRS. RUSHLOW-They said between Highland Avenue and the Boulevard. MR. ROULIER-This comes down to an intersection point, like this. MRS. RUSHLOW-Right, that belonged to Boulevard Auto, didn't it? 46 '- '-- MR. ROULIER-That'ij right. MRS. RUSHLOW-That'ij What the land, I thought they owned. MR. ROULIER-No, that'ij not the property. MR. WELLER-It'ij way up the hill from there. MR. ROULIER-It'ij further up. MRS. RUSHLOW-More toward Seeleys? MR. WELLER-Seeleys, yes. In fact, Seeleyij is the next neighbor. MRS. RUSHLOW-I didn't think there was 2. acres of land there at that point, anyway How could you put anything on a point like that. MR. WELLER-No, it's up. MRS. RUSHLOW-I didn't know where there piece of land was. I'll tell you right now, and I wondered how they could put anything Where I was. MR. CARR-Well, you're still a neighbor. MRS. RUSHLOW-I am ijtill a neighbor and I feel that I don't need the traffic. I've got enough down there right now, that's all I can say. We have tractor trailers running up and down there like crazy, right now. MR. TURNER-Big dump trucks and tractor trailers cut across Highland Avenue to get onto Warren. MRS. RUSHLOW-Yes, they do. It's been crazy trying to raise a family down there. MR. TURNER-I know. I go that way myself, lots of times. It's a short cut. You've got the traffic light there, now. It's not such a hazard. PAT JAMESON MRS. JAMESON-My name is Pat Jameson and I'd like to ask a question and make a statement. My question is, is the plaza that was planned for Highland and Dix, that was gping to exit onto Highland Avenue, is that still in? MR. TURNER-I'm not sure. Pat? I can't answer that question. Can you answer that, MRS. COLLARD-I don't know. Do you know of any, Lee? MRS. JAMESON-They were here. MR. TURNER-By the old Riley house? Where Riley's house used to be? MRS. JAMESON-No, are you talking about Suprenant's house? MR. TURNER-I mean Suprenants. MRS. JAMESON-No, I'm talking about the other side of Quaker Road from there, Where Charlebois was planning a plaza. Is that still going in there? It waij supposed to exit on to Highland. MRS. YORK-Mr. Charlebois isn't gping to be developing that, my understanding is, until there are sewers down there. He's recently aijked for an extension. MRS. JAMESON-I wondered if he was coming around Highland, how close to thiij property he would be, on Highland. MRS. YORK-To tell you the truth, I can't anijWer that. MRS. JAMESON-If that would make a difference with thiij property, and the other thing was, the Supervisor told me that the next stage of the sewer is gping from Queensbury Industrial Park, down Queensbury Avenue to the Boulevard, and then over to Ceiba Geigy and I would think this property wouldn't have far to go to 47 tie into the sewer, if that's the next stage of the sewer, the sewer shouldn't be too far away, that was all. MRS. RUSHLOW-Will this type of a set up bring more water down at us? Of the 40 years I've lived there, I never had water in my cellar until you permitted this drainage thing up on top of us and it's all coming right down my back door. I've complained about it. As far as water and sewer. As far as water and sewage coming down Highland Avenue. When it gets into the water drains down there, ~'re flooded. It's not taking care of the water. We are floating in water. MR. CARR-As I understand their proposal, they're going to have some sort of retention area with a slow drainage release mechanism to keep the water on the property and release it in an orderly fashion into the stormwater runoff system. MRS. RUSHLOW-Is that, a stormwater system, is that what we have at the end of Highland Avenue and all the water runs into a drain? MRS. EGGLESTON-That doesn't work? Is that what you're going to say? MRS. RUSHLOW-Well, \\hat I'm saying is, it doesn't work. It hasn't been working ever since they pushed all that water. MR. TURNER-That might be the total system, right there. MRS. RUSHLOW-It can't handle it, what they've done on top. MR. TURNER-No, it never can. Yes, you're right. MR. CARR-Mr. Weller, would you like to explain the system? MRS. RUSHLOW-Forty years wi. thout water and when this development started, on top of the hill, they closed in our quarry behind us, Jerry Brown closed it in. Water is a very serious situation for us, down there. I just don't want to have anything else enhance the problem, which it doesn't seem like it would, if he's got all the pipes to pipe it off of do whatever he has to do. I'm concerned. I'm very concerned about industrial down in there. I realize Quaker Road is growing up and it's ~tting big, but it's a bad situation down in that comer. Thank you. MR. WELLER-Well, the water from the property goes there, now, and the plan would be that, certainly, if we developed the land wi thout managing the stormwater, the water would go there a lot faster. So, the plan is to be sure that the water doesn't go there any faster than it does now. I can't speak for what the particular problems might be with the drainage system down there. There looks, to me, like there's problems down there with municipal facilities that need to be worked on, beyond the sewer system. I didn't realize there's, apparently, a problem with the water system down there and that may be part of the prob lem, why there's a problem with the water system. Whatever problem there is, now, ~ will not make it any WOrse and, if there's a way to do it, ~'ll alleviate it to whatever extent we can. MR. TURNER-It looks like you've only got, how many feet from Highland Avenue to your finished floor? You've got 208 elevation, there and 211 at the existing hydrant, the marker? How much rock are you going to have to take out of there, Jim? MR. WELLER-We're not going to have to take any rock out. MR. TURNER-Nothing out? MR. WELLER-We don't expect to have to take any rock out, no. MR. TURNER-You're going to work around it? MR. WELLER-That's right. It's a slope lot. The building needs to be a truck high building, on at least one end, for loading docks. They'll be on the lower end of the property. So, ~'11 tend to build the building at the level of the higher end of the property and let it drop off at the loading docks at the lower end and then it's at the lower end of the property w-here we plan to collect the stormwater. MR. SICARD-There's no storm sewage of any kind down there, is there Jim, on the Boulevard, let's say. 48 -- - MR. WELLER-Yes, there is. MR. SICARD-There is storm sewage on the Boulevard? MR. WELLER-Yes, I think it's indicated on the drawing, but where it goes, I'm not sure. MR. SICARD-Are you saying that you, possibly, can tap into that? MR. WELLER-That's where the drainage now goes and that's where I would expect the drainage will continue to go. I don't believe there's any other place to take it. MR. KELLEY-I was just trying to think of the hardship status, in terms of, the lot configuration or its topography. If you were to put an allowable use in there, let's say a restaurant, for example, a fast food restaurant I think was permitted. MR. TURNER-Automobile sales and service, cold storage is permitted. MR. KELLEY-Would those types of businesses require more parking which maybe wouldn't fit because of the shape of the land or, I don't know. I'm just exploring ideas. MRS. EGGLESTON-I don't think you'd ever see a fast food in there because the dust would settle on the hamburger, by the time it passed through the drive in window to your car. MR. TURNER-You've got to have one space for every thousand square feet of floor space, parking. MR. SICARD-How about the Town Board changing the zone? MR. TURNER-That would be the only other way to go, would be for the Town Board to change the zone. MR. SICARD-Have you explored that at all, Jim, about going to the Town Board to change the zone? MR. WELLER-We have given that consideration. MR. TURNER-Did it fall on deaf ears, or what? MR. WELLER-How do you make the decision on which route you go? There are Highway Commercial businesses in that area, on the Boulevard side, especially. Then you've got those businesses that are nonconforming, so what is the appropriate route to go? I still go back to drawing on fine line on this F. W. Webb operation. If they, in fact, did what J. Sawyers does and opened up a counter and one end of the building and let people come in a buy rulers and tapes and pipe dope and a few things like this, they'd become what Glens Falls Electric is and they'd be permitted. MR. SICARD-That's right. I thought of that, that's hardware. Hardware extends into that plumbing and heating business. MR. WELLER-That's where that fine line is drawn, here. MR. TURNER-They do have a counter, but just to the contractors and the wholesalers. MR. WELLER-I understand, but, with the stroke of a pen, they could change their policy, accept you and I, there, as customers, to do our homeowner repairs and, all of a sudden, they become absolutely conforming. MR. TURNER-Yes, but this is far more than a hardware store. This is a huge pipe distribution operation and that's the top of their line, that's what they push for. They don't care about the little stuff. They want the big stuff. MR. WELLER-Very similar to Glens Falls Electric. MR. TURNER-Yes. They want to sell the big stuff and make the big money, turn that over fast. No one else want to speak? Anybody from F.W. Webb? None? Okay. Public hearing is closed. PUBLIC BlARING ø.OSED 49 '-"" COIUIISPœDØfŒ Warren County Planning Board approved Letter from Woodland Real E/$tate, Marianne Facklam, Realtor, to Jame/$ M. Weller, P.E., dated September 5th, 1990 (attached) Letter from JO/$eph Roulier, to Jame/$ M. Weller, P.E., dated September 5th, 1990 (attached) STAFF INPUT Note/$ from John Goral/$ki, Planner (attached) MR. SHEA-I have a que/$tion for Jim. the building? Jim, ~at' /$ the exterior con/$truction of MR. WELLER-The building ha/$n I t been del:;igned in all it' I:; detail, yet. F. W. Webb ha/$ I:;tandardl:; that they use for their buildings. As I think you mentioned, they've got a new store in Rutland. They've got one that just opened in Syracuse and the drawings we've seen are, typically, pre-engineered buildings with metal siding on them and some masonry, masonry veneer, that's the buildings that we've seen, but this building has not been designed yet. MR. CARR-Jeff, do we table it? MR. KELLEY-Well, he's not talking about an area variance. I have a question, ~ll, for Joe and Marianne, actually. sale since '86? It's a use variance. You've had this for MR. ROULIER-No, I purchased it in '86. MR. KELLEY-Okay, you've had it for sale since? MR. ROULIER-Approximate1y, mid '87. MR. KELLEY-Okay. Did you show it to anybody, on your own? MR. ROULIER-No. I spoke to a couple of people that I do business with, to generate some interest on that way, and they weren't interested and then, like I said earlier, I advertised it in the newspaper, even to the point where I put in the newspaper that there would be no down payments. I'd carryall the paper, and there were no inquiries. MR. KELLEY-No inquires? Okay. MRS. EGGLESTON-Mr. Roulier, may I ask you what you paid for the property in '86? MR. ROULIER-Yes, I paid $38,000 for it. MRS. EGGLESTON-And what is your asking price? What has it been through these past? MR. ROULIER-I originally marketed it at $250,000 and have dropped it, now, to the contract price of $190,000. MRS. EGGLESTON-Okay, thank you. MR. KELLEY-Marianne, you marketed this for 15 months and, did you show the property, or is there anyone that showed the property, that you know of? MRS. FACKLAM-As far as I know, there were very few telephone calls asking questions because we did advertise it in the Albany area. We did it in an ad in the Metropolitan New York paper, in combination with other commercial properties. We had inquiries, but we had nothing more than that. MR. KELLEY-No one went to look at it and said? MRS. FACKLAM-I can't say for sure because I'm not the only one that would have answered those calls. It IS p088ible 8omeone did drive by and take a look, but I'm 8ure that the addre88 was given out. 50 -- , MR. KELLEY-Alright. I was trying to get some information, in terms of, people looking at it for one of the permitted uses and saying, ~ll, if it's too weird a shape or the traffic patterns lousy. MRS. FACKLAM-No, in all that time, with all that advertising, there was just one offer and that was with the Webb Company. LAWREN CE POWE RS MR. POWERS-There isn't any storm sewers down on the Highland Avenue or the Boulevard either. All that water that goes down there goes in a ditch both ways and it winds up down where the traffic light is. This lady, here, gets most of it in her cellar. There's no sewers of any kind, there. They're talking about it, but it could be a long while. MR. KELLEY-The plan that we have shows an existing catch basin. MR. TURNER-Yes, it shows a catch basin. MR. WELLER-In fact, the Town of Queensbury has got a high pressure hose hooked to the fire hydrant down there and it's flushing water into that catch basin, constantly and I've inquired as to why they're doing that and there's, apparently, a concern with the old pipes and the water system in that end of Town and they're trying to keep a constant flow of water through the pipes to control the turbidity and coloration of the water. The catch basin is near the Perkins home. MR. KELLEY-I'm trying to think about what the extraordinary circumstances are. I guess nobody's interested. I don't know that that is one. MR. TURNER-The only thing that I say, this belongs in a Light Industrial. It might be a fine line, but it's not that fine. This is a distribution business, Wiether it be pipe, Wiether it be fittings or whatever and the contractors have to come there and pick up fittings and stuff, but it's still a distribution center and I'm not willing to change my mind on that. I know the operation. MR. KELLEY-I'm looking at the tests that are required for Use Variance and the one that, probably, is usually the toughest one, Joyce, remember, is Number Two, Can it yield a reasonable financial return if used for any of the permitted uses and I know what you're saying, Joe. You marketed it and Marianne had marketed it, but if you've had nobody really looking at it, I don't know that that means that, because it's not zoned right, Or there's just no market at this point in our lives for the piece of property. MR. CARR-I think that proves the point exactly is that, it was zoned Highway Commercial and nobody, for four years or three years, would touch it and that the only person who's touched it is somebody who doesn't want to be, is not zoned, for Highway Commercial, but that whole area around there, there's a lot of Light Industrial around there. I think that's what proves the point, that there is a financial hardship on this property, is when you cannot sell it as zoned, for that long a period, and a real active marketing of it, not only with Woodland, but with Manor Homes, I think it was. MR. KELLEY-I hear what you're saying. I guess the thing, to me, would be, I'd be more inclined to believe that if they came in and said, hey, look, we got a list of 15 people that went down there and everyone of these people said, what a great, but it's not zoned right. The fact is, nobody looked at it or one or something. To me, there's a difference there. If you had a whole bunch of people that said, gee, it isn't zoned right or somebody eláe went down and looked and said, gee, it's a weird shaped piece of property, or, the topography is so messed up, it's not easy to go in there and do something, those are things that I would say fall under these special circumstances. MR. SHEA-But under the second criteria for the granting of that variance, ~'re not mandated to go that far. The wording does not state that you have to give it that second test. MR. KELLEY-Well, it says you have to give all four. MR. SHEA-No, I'm talking about wi thin a reasonab Ie financial return. You just said that you would feel more comfortable if there were 15 offers on that property for Highway Commercial use and then you would say, it probably should be re-zoned because, then, it would be able to yield a financial return. This is not saying 51 '- - that we have to go that far. All this simply says is that the property, presently, is not yielding a financial return. MR. SICARD-The way it's zoned. MR. SHEA-Also, it is not saying that we have to qualify it with regards to a slow and down turned real estate market. .We don't have to qualify it by that, either. I mean, a number of times, in several of our last meetings, ~'ve had the occasion to consider properties that have been marketed and there's been no interest in the property. We've always tried to disqualify that by saying, ~ll, there hasn't been interest in any properties becau¡;¡e the real estate market is soft, that's not a test that I feel that we have to give, at this point. I don't see that, here, in the wording, as far as trying to fulfill the criteria for granting a variance. MR. SICARD-Also, isn't it normal, I'll ask the realtor here. a buyer, for a piece of property of this magnitude, isn't it that they ask you what zone it's in? A person comes in, normal, right away, MRS. FACKLAM-eertainly, it is and quite often they're already familiar with it. MR. SICARD-That's pretty much of a situation, is it, normally? People come in and say, \\hat zone is this piece of property in, I'm interested in it, and so forth, right away? MRS. F ACKLAM - Ri gh t. MR. SICARD-Therefore, you probably don't get turndowns. Probably, the buyer turns himself down when he finds out it's not in the right zone that he wants, thinking that he's going to have a hard time to try and change it. MRS. FACKLAM-That's correct. MR. KELLEY-Right. MRS. EGGLESTON-I'd like to ask this lady a question. Do you think it inhibited the sale, the fact that, in 1986 it was purchased for $38,000 and you turn around with, say, less than one year, and you're asking $240,000. Do you feel, as a real estate dealer, it was worth, maybe that is why people didn't buy it, it's just priced too high. MRS. FACKLAM-No, I don't think so. I'm sure that someone else might have bought it for $50,000, quickly, but I think the value's in the property, because of it's use and I think that's something that F.W. Webb realized and certainly others, too, would understand why they're purchasing it for that amount of money. MR. TURNER-They're purchasing it for a matter of convenience, too. MRS. FACKLAM-Sure they are. MR. TURNER-Because their direct route from New Hampshire is right in line wi th that location and they're direct route from Albany, for piping and stuff, is right in that location. MRS. F ACKLAM-Ri ght. MR. TURNER-It's a convenient location for them. MRS. FACKLAM-So, it is a valuable piece of property. MR. CARR-Isn't it better than downtown Glens Falls on Warren Street, though? MR. TURNER-It belongs in Light Industrial, it's as simple as that. MRS. EGGLESTON-I will say there's a lot of Light Industry for sale around Exit 18 of the Northway. MR. TURNER-There's a lot of it for sale. MRS. EGGLESTON-Where he could get right off the Northway. MR. SICARD-There's a lot of it. 52 -- MRS. EGGLESTON-There is. MR. TURNER-F. W. Webb Industrial property, Wiatsoever. hasn't come here and ~ can't purchase it. said, look, ~ have looked at Light There's been no testimony to that, MR. CARR-But that's not the test. Isn't the test, this property? This property, can it be used as Highway Commercial? MR. TURNER-yes, I think it can. MR. CARR-And the testimony, tonight, has been shown that there has been absolutely no interest in it in four years, as Highway Commercial. MR. TURNER-I think the price has got a lot to do with it. MR. KELLEY-Let me ask you this. Joe, assuming 20 people, real estate people, showed this property, did any of them call you and say, gee, Joe, I had a looker today and they expressed an interest, but it's for a different zone? I mean, that's what real estate people are supposed to do. They're supposed to give you feedback on every client, every potential customer. Did you ~t a lot of feedback from people saying it's zoned wrong? MR. ROULIER-I didn't get any feedback to that effect because there was no one out there interested in the property. MR. CARR-There's two ways to show negative zoning, here. One is to show that everybody who came in said, gee, if this was Light Industrial, I would have bought it. Or they're coming in and saying absolutely nobody wants it. I mean, each one proves the point, the financial hardship. MR. KELLEY-I don't know. I think there's a difference there. MR. CARR-Well, there is a difference, yes. I mean, it's a different way, but it's proving the same point. MR. TURNER-I think when you go from a $38,000 purchase price to $250,000 asking price and down to $190,000 asking price, that's the hardship. MR. CARR-So, you're saying it was priced too high? MR. TURNER-Absolutely. MR. ROULIER-Can I just address that? Even when I had advertised it on my own, with no price in the paper, indicating that there would be no down payment and that I would hold the balance, there was not one phone call regarding that property and, yes, the price did go from $38,000, a year later, to $250,000, but, four years later, the price is back down to $190,000 and $190,000 isn't out of line with the prices of properties selling in that area at this time. MR. CARR-I don't feel it's a high price for 2.2 acres, Highway Commercial or Light Industrial. MR. SHEA-It's not. MR. TURNER-Okay, no further comment? Motion's in order. JIO'fION TO APPROVE USE VAJUANCE NO. 68-1990 JAlßtS II. WELLER, P.E., Introduced by Michael Shea who moved for its adoption, seconded by Bruce Carr: I believe the owner of the property has demonstrated a specific hardship with regards to the marketing of property which he has been conducting for several years. Further, a reasonable financial return has not been yielded due to the present permitted uses and further I do not believe the variance would be materially detrimental to the Ordinance. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Carr, Mr. Shea NOES: Mr. Kelley, Mr. Turner ABSENT: Mrs. Goetz 53 "--' On motion meeting was adjourned. RE SP ECTFULL Y S UBMI TTED , Theodore Turner, Chairman 54 . - '"-,, - TOWN OF QUEENSBURY P1:11ftftiftg Department -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner September 12, 1990 Date: By: Stuart G. Baker x Area Variance Use Variance - Sign Variance ::= Interpretation Other: SubdiYision: Sketch, Prelim· - - mary, Site P1an ReYiew ::= Petition far a ChaDge of Zone Freshwater WetJanda Permit FiDal AppJicatioD Number: Area Variance No. 57-1990 AppJicant'. Name: Timothy Barber (Sue and Dick Rourke, owners) MeetiDg Date: September 19, 1990 ............................................................................................ This application was tabled by the Board at the July 25, 1990 meeting in order for the applicant to provide further information. (Findings sheet at tached. ) A survey map showing the limits of the proposed expansion was submitted to the Planning Department. No alternate plans were submitted for staff review. The survey map submitted shows a proposed footprint expansion of ±48% (±576 sq. ft.). The distance of the shoreline setback is not shown. The shoreline setback should be'measured from the proposed expansion to the mean high water mark at the shore, as per definitions 261 and 263 in Article 2 of the Ordinance. This information must be shown on the plans before the Board. (The original plan submitted showed a proposed shoreline setback of 45 ft., although this distance was not based on a survey and was not drawn to scale.) I have" "attached the minutes of the July 25th meet ing, along with Lee York's original staff comments. SBlpw .-----.- ·, TOWN OF QUEENSBURY Say.' ¡;~1/wIQ RoC. ~D/Iy, NY :2IJ(U.enSo-S71J.792·5a32 - - Theodore Turner, Chairman R.D. .5, Box 409 139 Meadowbrook Ro..t Queeubury, New Ycrk 1Z804 susan Geotz, Secretary 19 Wincrelt Drive Queeubury, New York 12.804 TOI Thru~thv Balth.. RE: Area Variance No. 57-1990 Timothy Barber P.O. Box 432.3 Queenabury, New York 12.804 Owners: Sue and Dick Rourke Glen Lake AT'1'N: Timothy Barber DATE: July 2,5, 1990 Meeting Date We have reviewed the requelt for: ~ Area Variance U.. Variance Sip Variance Other and have the foUowing recommendatioDI: APPROVED DENIED ..JL TABLED RESOLVED: IIO'rIOII TO TABU ADA VARIAIICB 110. 57-1990 TDIO'IB'I ....., IntlOduced by Theodore Turner who moved for it I adoption, seconded by Char lei Sicardl Until the applicant can clarify the _alwoe_nta with a lurvey of the property and brinl the plans for the houae and any alternate plans that he .ay have looked at before he arrived at thil plan. Duly adopted thil 25th d-., of July, 1990, by the following votel A1BSI Mr. Shea, Mrl. Goetz, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Turner NOES I NON! ABSEIITI Mr. Carr PLEASE READ THE BACK OF TlUS FORM TIwùt you. AppI'OYal of thia appUcatiOl1 meau that the appUcut cu DOW apply far a Butldi". PenDit UDle. your 1uda are Adirondack Park juri8dictioul. . . S~~ 9~ Tbeo4CIN Tunaer, ChainDu Queeubury ZémiDt Boud of Appeala 1"1'/_ eel Sue &Dei Dick Rourke '10 . - '- -- TOWN OF QUEENSBURY PI.nniw,g Department -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: July 23, 1990 By: Lee York X Area VariaDce U.. VariaDce - Sip VariaDce ,:= IDterpretatiaa Other: SubdiYiåoD: Sketc:b, _ PrelimÜlary, Site PlaIa Re.ïew - - Petition fQl" a ChaDge of ZcDe - Freshwater WetlaDda Permit FiDal Appticatiaa Number: Area Variance No. 57-1990 Appticaat'. Name: Timothv Barber. Owner: Sue and Dick Rourke MeetiDø Date: Julv 25. 1990 ............................................................................................ The applicant is requesting relief from side and shoreline setbacks. The zone is WR-1A and the applicant intends to renovate and enlarge a preexisting nonconforming structure. The requested relief is 16 feet, 22 feet, and 23 feet on the sides, as opposed to the requirement of a sum of 50 feet on the side with a minimum of 20 feet per side. The shoreline request is for 45 feet rather than the required 75 feet. Glen Lake formerly was the site for many seasonal '¥Se camps. Over the years, many of the structures along the lake have been renovated to year round use. The Rourke's property is 2Z5 feet by 64 feet on the lakeshore. The Rourke's must meet the tests for an Area Variance. These are: Are thee IIp8Cia1 COIIditions applyiDg to this property or buiJlling. aDd not applyiDg to othen m the .....1Iœhood? The application states that the house is a shack. This does not address the question as the applicant currently has the ability to upgrade the existing structure with no variances. The other lots in the neighborhood are similar in nature. The lots hold camps which have been upgraded. Page 1 of 2 "-' ~. AV57-1990 Would the strict application of the OrdiDance deprive the applicant of reasonable use of the ~t7? The applicant can bring the CWTent structure up to code with no variances. The Ordinance has not deprived the applicant of reasonable use of the property. Would the strict application of the dimeDBional requirements result in a specified practical difficulty? No. The applicant has no practical difficulty. He has the ability to upgrade his camp because he desires to enlarge it, and is not a practical difficulty created by the Ordinance. Would the variaDce be materially detrimental to the OrdiDance or to property in the diatrict? The Comprehensive Land Use Plan which is the philosophy behind the Ordinance states that the intensity of private shoreline development has detracted from the shoreline appearance, and increased the nutrient loading of Glen Lake. The scenic and recreational uses such as swimming and fishing have been impaired because of this. One of the strategies listed with regard to the water resources is to reduce densities in aquifer recharge areas and areas of high soil percolation, which is the Glen Lake area. Another is to reduce potential development intensities in the vicinity of sensitive water resources. The Town Board has declared Glen Lake and the land within 100 feet of the shoreline a Critical Environmental Area. The Zoning and Ordinances were based on the can-ying capacity of the land, and continued expansion of use and area on sensitive lands is detrimental to the purposes of the Ordinance and to the property in the district. 18 the request the miDimal relief to alleviate the practical difficulty? The applicant has other alternatives which would require no variances. He could add a partial second story with site plan approval. He could also expand in the rear, away from the Lake which would give him the minimum of 20 feet side setbacks, although the total would not be 50 feet, it would be close to it. Utilizing either of these alternatives, there would be less impact on the neighbors or the lake. LA Y Ised Page 2 of 2 · ~ -- about future planning. Should a garage be proposed in the future, by granting this variance, it would allow for the proper area for a garage to be built that would conform with all the setbacks. There was no neighborhood opposition. Duly adopted this 25th day of July, 1990, by the following vote. AYES. Mr. Kelley, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Shea, Mr. Turner NOES. NONE ABSENT. Mr. Ca rr A~ VAtiAlIG MO. 57-1990 T"'E II .-lA TIKatHY BADD 01110. IOUIIU .JA~ lOAD, GLII LAKI FOR UPAJlSICII œ EXISTIMC IESIDIIRCB. JILl.. nøt SIDI AND SHOBLIBE SlTBA~ 1IQ8IIIMIIR'l'S. (1/iA.1lIIB OJœn TAX MAP MO. 43-1-15 Lor SIZE. 14,400 SQ. n. SECrICII 4.020 - D, 7.012 SIB AND DI~ IEQIESTIMC PLANMIMC) TIM BARBER, PRESENT MR. TURNER-I've got a question for you. How bad is the present, seasonal dW'elling? MR. BARBER-The present seasonal dwelling has no permanent foundation under it. The house is, approximately, over 50 years of age. I'd like to submit some pictures that are of the structure. MR. TURNER-How bad is it, internally? MR. BARBER-Internally, the structure, the rafters are MR. TURNER-Is it salvageable or not? MR. BARBER-No, it's not salvageable, sir. It would have to be completely gutted and restructured on the inside, t he rafters and also the floor joys and a lot of the stud members. MR. TURNER-And the lot is, What, 200? How big is that lot? MR. BARBER-225 by 65, I believe. MR. TURNER-225 by 64. MR. BARBER-64. MR. TURNER-Why would you not consider tearing it down and moving it back, so you can meet the shoreline setback? MR. BARBER-We are considering tearing it down. We are not considering moving it back because, if we moved it back, it would hinder the view of the Lake. All other homes next to it are either closer or at the same point at the start of this existing home. If we moved it back, WI would not be able to have the view shared by others of the Lake. MR. TURNER-You'd have to move it back 30 feet. MR. BARBEl-Exactly. MR. TURNER-Is that an 8 or a 5, that's a 5, 30 feet. MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. TURNER-Okay, anyone else have any questions? MR. BARBER-Could I submit these pictures? MR. TURNER-Sure. MR. BARBER-I have a couple of letters from..neighbors, here. There's a picture of the pump, there. The home has severely lacked maintenance over the years, as you can tell. MR. TURNER-Yes, it needs a new roof and everything. MR. BARBER-The lumber's badly dry rotted throughout. 32 1 I · ,. --- - MR. TURNER-How far back is the house to the right and to the left? How far back is it? MR. BARBER-To the right and to the left, I'm going to make an approximation and not mea lure it. I'm going to say either of equal distance or MR. TURNER-Are they ahead of the structure that we're talking about or are they behind it? MR. BARBER-The left is to the head. Looking to the Lake, t he one to the left is ahead and the one to the right is behind. SUE ROURKE MRS. ROURKE-I'm Sue Rourke. I was just going to tell Tim the house on the right il up on a little rise and that's setback. He had it right and the one to the left's just forward. MR. KELLEY-Yes, I guess I don't know that I'm totally clear on the extent of W'hat we're going to do here. Are we going to take the basic building and remodel it and just add on off the side? MR. BARBER-No, W! want to demolish the existing building. First of all, it has no permanent crawl space or anyt hing else and to remodel it would be, in a sense, to totally rebuild it. MR. KELLEY-Ted, I guess, if I understand him right, if they tore it down, they could build on the footprint that they've got? MR. TURNER-But they're expanding the footprint. MR. KELLEY-Right. MR. TURNER-Timmy, you've got a dimension one way, but you don't have the other two the other way. Let's see, you've got 24 foot wide in the back, that'l the size of the existing camp. How wide is this right here? MR. BARBER-This right here is 23 feet. MR. TURNER-This is 23 feet? MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. TURNER-No, that's from there to that side, how wide is.. MR. BARBER-No, that's not a MR. TURNER-That I s nothing, a porch? MR. BARBER-No, there's nothing there. MR. TURNER-So, the size of the camp is 24 by 51? MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-I guesl I'm confuled. The existing footprint, then, is 24 by 51? MR. BADER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-Alright, so that'l 1224 square feet and, in theory, I gue.I, you can make it two story.. So, you could make a 2448 square foot house without getting any variance. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-I would think that you ought to look at a different floor plan. MR. BARBER-Yes, W! were considering that, too, but, also, she is moving up from a home in Glenl Falls, ~ich, they have resided there for many years and they need aU the room they can get. That I. why we're going for thil Area Variance. we want to widen the haul. and alia bring it back. MR. SICARD-But you could get more square footage if you were to build two story.. 33 " --- -- MR. BARBER-Yes, toe a1s~ do want to go up two storys over that one section. The existing structure that s there has a small loft and the rest of it is a cathedral type building. MR. TURNER-Where the camp is and to the back of the camp, in the back of the camp were that hump starts to come up. You've got, probably, Iobat, 100 feet, 75 feet? MR. BARBER-From the camp to where that hump starts to come up? MR. TURNER-Yes, it's about 75 feet? MR. BARBER-No, it's probably 10 feet. MR. TURNER-It's more than that, isn't it? MR. BARBER-You mean the rise in the stone wall? Oh, yes, from the back door to the, yes, it's probably 90 to 100 feet. MRS. EGGLESTON-So, how much square footage are you asking for? MR. BARBER~We're asking for 3100 square feet, total. MRS. GOETZ-That close to the Lake. Okay, this is a chance to improve the situation when the new Land Use Plan was written because of over development on water bodies, that's why their stricter shoreline setbacks went into effect. MR. BARBER-Right. MRS. GOETZ-And I would think anyone on the Lake would want to improve the situation and move back from the Lake, not be right on top of it. MR. BARBER-But what we're saying, here, if we do move back, the home, looking out the window, t he front of the home, we want to put a nice great room, sitting room and, if you were to move the home back, toe would be looking out our windows and seeing the two adjacent neighbors on both sides. we would not be able to take in a sense, a view of the Lake as the adjacent neighbors. we would be setback. MRS. GOETZ-But that's just one thing that people have to deal with. They just have to face reality, that ti_s have changed and we need to improve our visual environment. MR. TURNER-You're in the lower end of that Bay. You're on this side of the point, aren't you? MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. TURNER-So, you can't see we st? MR. BARBER-We can see, from a standpoint of where we are now, yes, toe can see southwst. We can just make it by the point. MR. TURNER-You can just make it by the point? MR. BARBER-You can just see by the point, but, if we were to move back, the neighbor on the right of us, Tinney, they're elevated, and above us. MR. TURNER--œs, I know. MR. BARBER-And, if we were to move back, 1i1ere would be sitting in the living room, you'd be looking into their home. You would not be able to see around their hOlll8 . MRS. EGGLESTON-How close to the line is the house? When I did the site inspection there was a lot of people at the house to the right and already that's very close. I _an, you could have joined their party from the house and you're proposing to go closer. . MR. BADER-You're saying looking at the Lake to the right? MR. EGGLESTON--œs, to the right. 34 '- -- MR. BARBER-We're not proposing to go closer to that house at all. MRS. EGGLESTON-How close is that house, though, to this? MR. BARBER-From the house to that property line, it's close to 23 feet. MRS. EGGLESTON-I mean the house next door. How far are they from this, the property line? MR. BARBER-Oh, from their property line, probably, 10 feet back from, I would say, 10 to 12 feet. MR. TURNER-And the other house the other way? MR. BARBER-Yes, they're somewhat, probably, 15 feet, off their property line. MRS. EGGLESTON-That's a lot of house. MR. BARBER-They need a lot of room. MRS. EGGLESTON-It sounds almost like two family. MR. BARBER-No, 108 need a lot of closet space. We have a lot of belongings and gatherings that, t his is going to be a retirement home and they want to do it once and get it over with, to make it architecturally blend in with the rest of the area and not have to add on. The down stairs 1oIOuld be a 30 by 60 and the upper portion, 108 wanted to step that back to a 30 by 40 which would give us outside dimensions of 1200 square feet, basically, no, W!'d have to put a crawl space. MR. TURNER-They go about 4 or 5 feet? MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. TURNER-There, again, 108' re not talking about whether they can see up the Lake or not, we're asking for relief from the setback. MR. KELLEY-I know, I mean, the existing building didn't really meet the side lines. I guess my own feeling 1oIOuld be either let's try to move it back and see if we can conform more or take the footprint that's there and go with that or, I guess, I was going to say, you can't add on the back, or can you, because then you're not in the same footprint, right? MR. BARBER-The only problem being, though, if we did move it back, they 1oIOuld lose enjoyment of the property, that's why we're going for those reliefs. MRS. GOETZ-But, there are going to be limitations to developing on a waterfront. You can't have it all and when we hear all this talk about the Glen Lake Association is concerned about their surroundings and then we have somebody come in that wants to build a huge house so close to the Lake. We get different messages from people around Glen Lake. I fully agree with what Joyce had said earlier this evening. I mean, 108 have to think of it from that aspect and what the COmprehensive Land Use Plan, the"purposes of it. MRS. EGGLESTON-How long has she owned this property? MR. BADER-They have owned it for about 50 years. They are the original, the Rourke family's the original builder of that home of the camp that 18 there now and we're also, for the proposed septic, the septic is right next to the home, al in the print, there. We want to move that way to the back and have a pump up system to the back and get an engineer to approve the system for the site. MRS. GOETZ-You have to do that anyway. MR. BADER-Yes. . MRS. EGGLESTON-It would appear to me there could be a little give here. Not to be hard nosed, but that's one whale of a house to put between the.. two existing. It would be like MR. BADER-If you look around, though, you'll notice that _ny of the homes on Glen Lake are of that size and character. We've even been involved in building lama of them . 35 - -- - MRS. GOETZ-But the people on Glen Lake have a tendency to create some of their own problems by having this type of thing done. MRS. EGGLESTON-It seems to be 1£ you're, I gueu I'm going to say, well liked, nobody complains. On the other hand, that they're up here in mass, don't do that to the Lake. It's hard to get a direct message. MI.. SHEA-If the two most important factors is building. .the amount of distance that you end up being back from the Lake and I know that that's a major..taking advantage of that adjoining..being as close to the Lake as you can be..is reasonable and then the size of the house, if it's going to be a permanent retirement residence. Probably the best recoDlDendation for you would be to keep the same footprint and go two storys, which would give you 2448 square foot which, in and of itself, is still a large house for that neighborhood and then you wouldn't be required to ask for a variance from the shcreline setback. MRS. EGGLESTON-I was just going to add, too, t he houses around you have decks or porches. This does not call for a deck or a porch, am I right? MI.. BARBER-This is correct. MRS. EGGLESTON-So, were you to get this, would you come back and say, I need a porch or a deck? MI.. BARBER-No, the structure that's going to be built, the front room is going to be a step dO""1\ to the existing level and then the rear is going to, to the slope of the land, it's going to come up a couple of steps. No, it would be conformed to the land. Ml.S. EGCLESTON-But without a porch or a deck? MR. BARBER-Yes. MRS. EGGLESTON-Well, I think Mike had a good suggestion, there. MR. BARBER-What we're really concerned with is, they're moving out of a home, downtown, that's approximately 3600 square feet and they have a lot of, over the years they've collected a lot of stuff and they really need the room. MRS. GOETZ-But they have to take into consideration where they would be living full time, now. There's a big difference between living in a city location or a to""1\ location and on the water front. It's just a reality that you have to deal with. MIl. TURNER-Okay, any other questions for Timmy? now. I'll open the public hearing PUBLIC BAlIK OPElID MONICA HATE . MIS. HATE-I'm Monica Hate and I'm the Rourke's neighbor to the north and I'm looking forward to Dick and Sue being my permanent neighbors and I know t hit any house that they build is going to be an improvement to our neighborhood. Ho_ver, upon looking at the plot plan submitted by the contractor, I find several mistakes and discrepancies which I would like to bring to the attention of the Board. The applicant's plot plan shows a total of 69 feet presently, house and two side lines. Now, they claim the lot is 6S feet, which I think is right, on the waterfront, but up in the back it's 60. So, 1£ you add up t bo.. lot line., it co.es to 69 feet, no," how can you fit that on a lot that'. a little more than 60 feet wide. Therefore, there i. an error in the plot plan. The propo.ed di..nsion. add up to 69 feet. Since the lot is about 60 odd feet wide, it has to encroach on some ene's land by 9 feet. Side line .etback on the north is pre..ntly shown as 22 feet. It'. actually 20 feet, according to my survey mea.ure..nts. Proposed side line setback, if variance is granted on the north, is shown as 16 feet. It will be 14 feet, becau.e of 2 foot area, if granted, or only 7 feet if there's an error of 9 feet. Adjoining property on the north shown as Doty's is incorrect. It's Hate. Adjoining property on the north shown as having no well, incorrect. There is a _11 on the adjoining property. The front setback from t I'e Lake is shown as 4S feet. Now, I'm not sure just where it'. being ..asured and, as the Lake wind. and turns, there'. a variance there, but I ..asured it as being around 39 feet. Now, I feel the applicant .hould be required to pre.ent the Board with 36 ,,- . f - -- ar accurate survey showing accurate information. It is clear that the information presented to the Board is incorrect. It could be off by 9 feet. Grant ing a variance on the north side as requested by applicant would officially recogJ:1ize 2 feet of my lot as belonging to the applicant and this is wrong. The applicant's have not shown any practical difficulty or hardship to justify t he variance they requested. They have only shown what they would like to do or prefer to do. Now. I still would like the Rourke's to be neighbors and I have no objection to a new home going up. but I feel I have to protect my property also. MR. TURNER-Okay, any questions? Thank you. MB. KELLEY-It appears, from the tax map, that measurement. It doesn't look bigger than that. that's not longer. that 60 feet is the correct (Referring to map) That's 64, MR. BARBER-Right, that is an error. MB. TURNER-I think, at this point, from the information received from the neighbor, I think we ought to table it until the measurements are clarified more and that side setback. MR. KELLEY-Alright, if \08' re going to get into that, do you actually have a set of drawings for the house? MR. BARBER-Yes, we do. We have a preliminary set of drawings that have just been , completed. MR. TURNER-And you just had a survey done, I believe didn't you? There's some stakes 'up there. Are those yours? MR. BARBER-No, those were not put in by a surveyor. MRS. HATE-They're mine. They ~ put in by a surveyor. They've been taken down several times. I've had the surveyor coming back to reset them. I'm paying for all of this. MR. BARBER-And, if need be, we wi 11 be glad to get our lot surveyed, too. MR. TURNU-Well, I think. we've got to have the right measurements. MR. BARBER-Sure. MR. TURNER-We can't deal with what we've got here. MR. BARBER-Right. MR. TURNER-Anyone else? MR. SHEA-I agree. MRS. EGGLESTON-I agree. MO'fIOR m UBL& AlIA YAII.&lICI NO. 57-1990 TIMO'fIY BA.... Introduced by The odore Turner who moved for its adoption. seconded by Charles Sicard. Until the applicant can clarify the measuremenU with a survey of the property and bring the plans for the house and any alternate plana that he may have looked at before he arrived at thia plan. Duly adopted thia 25th day of July. 1990. by the following vote. AYES. Mr. Shea. Mrs. Goetz. Mr. Sicard. Mrs. Eggleston. Mr. Kelley. Mr. Turner NOES J NONE ABSENT. Mr. Carr MS. CORPUS-Tim, the best way to make sure the tax maps aren't wrong is øat a copy of the deed. MR. BARBER-Okay. MR. BAKER-Have that survey done from the deed. 37 . · --- MS. CORPUS -Yes. MR. KELLEY-Yes, I wouldn't take that as gospel. MS. CORPUS-Not the tax map. 00 motion meeting was adjourned. RESPEClFULL Y SUBMITTED, Theodore Turner, Chairman 38 r.; -- .----- . - -- - TOWN OF QUEENSBURY pi_nni.--g Department -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: September 17, 1990 By: John S. Gorlaski Area VariaDce -X Use Variance - Sip Variance == Interpretation SubdiWdoa: Sketch, _ PreJimiDary, Site Plan Re.iew - Petition far a ChaDge of Zone - Freshwater WetlaDda Permit FiDal Other: Applicatioa Number: Use Variance No. 58-1990 Applicant's Name: Tavlor and Lisa St~v~nson MeetiDg Date: September 19, 1990 ............................................................................................ The discussion at the previous Zoning Board of Appeals meeting centered around the owners ability to realize a reasonable return on the property. Several items have been subI!1itted to support the claim that a reasonable return cannot be realized from this property: 1) A letter froI!1 Cliff Summers Realty indicating that this property was marketed by their firr.1 for one year, but no offers were rel:eived. 2) A sworn affidavit by Howard LaRose describing his attempts to sell the property. 3) Tax deeds indicating that a buyer l:ould not obtain clear title to the property. If the Board feels that this evidence proves a financial hardship, you must then consider if the relief sought is the minimum relief necessary to alleviate the specific hardship. In this case, is allowing the applicant to use this site for a mobile home the least objectional use or is there some other way to relieve the hardship without a variance or with a variance that would have less impact on the neighborhood. JSG/sed · - -- - . -~. oy 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: September 12, 1990 By: Lee A. York, Senior Planner --X... Area Variance Use Variance - Sign Variance := Interpretation Other: SubdiYiaion: Sketch, _ Pre1imiDary, Site P1an Reriew - - Petition for a Change of Zone - Freshwater WetlaDda Permit FiDal Application Number: Area Variance No. 124-1989 Applicant'. Name: Anne M. Parrott MeetiDø Date: September 19, 1990 ............................................................................................ The applicant is requesting an extension of Area Variance No. 124-1989 (Resolution attacbed). The applicant bas indicated tbat sbe may not be able to obtain a Building Permit prior to tbe variance lapsing. Her intention is to begin construction at tbe earliest date possible. There does not appear to be any cbanges in tbe area tbat would impact tbis development and be cause for a reconsideration of tbe variance approvals. LA Y Ised A ttacbment I ~ I -- '--'" .w..... '-' t': ~ = VARIANCE NO. / (J.J.j~ J q 81 os. ·'U:PARTMEN'9' 88 Bay Street Glens Falls, New York 12801 August 29, 1990 Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Queensbury Bay & Haviland Roads Queensbury, New York 12804 Dear Zoning Board Members, i would like to request an extension on my area variance 1124- 1989. I haven't been able to start construction. Thank you very much for your kind attention to this matter. Sincerely, ê/-z).' ~A<~ Anne M. Parrott -...--_._~_.~ 1 uw:\¡ ut· l.1L t.t.."~tjL t< k Say at Hav"ana Roaa, OUHnsÞury, NY 12/104.9725-51/1·792·5832 -- Theodore Turner, Chairman R.D. .5, Box 409 139 Meadowbrook Road Queensbury, New York 1Z804 Susan Geotz, Seeretp.ry . 19 Winerest Drive ", ',.. ;; y Queensbury, New York U804 TO: Anne H. Parrott RE: Area Variance No. 1Z4-1989 88 Bav Street ,Glens Falls. N.Y. 12801 Anne M. PalTOtt off Big Bav Road ATTN: Anne H. Parrott DATE: October Z6, 1989 Meeting Date We have reviewed the request for: X Area .variance Use Variance Sip Variance Other and have the following recommendations: .,¿ APPROVED DENIED TABLED RESOLVED: ManOIl TO APPROVE AREA VARIAIICE 110. 124-1911. ANNE M. PARROTI'. Introduced by Michael Muller who moved for its adoption, seconded by Theodore Turner: The applicant seeks setback relief from the Hudson River of 55 feet and the house would be 6 feet back from the river. The sideline setback request is 14 feet from the proposed property line. The facts on this application are identical to the previous situation when the variance was granted September 28, 1988. The only thing that has changed is the 75 foot shoreline requirement. The home could not be placed further back on the property than where the request is now. This wiU be in line with the other existing buildings. No adverse impact shown in the EAF. This variance wiU also included relief from the zoning ordinance section. 7 .077. The two points that limit our feasible alternatives are the wen point is fixed and satisfactory in its now and the septic system is located in an area where its best situated. Duly adopted this'26th day of October, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: 4- Mr. Muller, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Turner NOESa Mrs. Eggleston ABSENT: Jeffrey Keney PLEASE READ THE BACK OF TinS FORM ThaDk you. Approval of thia application meana that the applicant can now apply f~· _ -..JldiDa Permit wùeu yoUI' laDda are Adirolldack Park jurilCiictioaal. S~~ 9~ Theodcn Tuner, Chairman Queeubury ZoniDl Board of Appeala TT/Met ---.---- . - '-.- F I-- ILL (" n~:, Y t,. u 1 t TOWN OF QUEENSBURY PI~nning Department -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: September 14, 1990 Lee A. York By: x Area V8I'ÏaDce Uøe Variance - Sip Variance == IDterpretaticm Other: SubdiWåoD: Sketch, _ Pre1imiDary, Site Plan Re'riew - Petition for a ChaDge of Zone - Freshwater Wet1aDd8 Permit FiDal Applicaticm Number: Area Variance No. 61-1990 Applicant's Name: Keith L. Harris MeetiDg Date: September 19, 1990 ............................................................................................ The Board tabled this application so the applicant could obtain a survey of the property. The new map submitted has numbers indicating that the existing structure is 24 i feet from Town property and the proposed addition wi 11 be 26 i feet from the Town line. I scaled the drawing submitted using the 1 inch equals 40 feet criteria given. The figures listed on the plan are inaccurate. The current structure measures 20 feet from the Town line and the proposed addition is 20 and 23 feet (depending on which corner the measurement is taken) from the Town line. I am assuming that the Board requested a professional survey of the property and the applicant >'did not understand the request. The Board needs accurate figures to grant an area variance. The applicant also needs to address the questions of minimal relief and the need for the addition to be in the proposed location. An addition of 800 square feet to a 1,040 square foot house is significant. From the plans presented I am unable to discern whether this would be an expansion of 50% of the gross floor area. The applicant does not present a floor plan or description of the number of floors existing or propQsed. The Board should request information to see if the applicant needs a variance from Section 9.011.B also. The applicant should provide information why the addition cannot be moved further north or reduced to require less of a variance. LAY/pw -.-------- p ~, - --- '- TOWN OF QUEENSBURY pt_ftft;ftg Department -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: September 18. 1990 By: Lee A. York X Area VariaDce Use Variance - Sip Variance :::: Interpretation SubdiYÏlåoa: Sketch, _ Pre1imiDary. Site Plan Reriew - - Petition for a ChaDge of Zone - Freshwater WetlaDda Permit FiDal Other: Application Number: Area Variance No. 65-1990 Applicant'. Name: Robert J. and Gail Huntz MeetiDg Date: September 19, 1990 ..................**..**.....**.......**.................................................... The request is to construct a two car garage with a 10ft which would be habitable space and a carport. The development requires a variance from the lake and the sideyard setbacks. The applicant states that the lot was designed to conform to the zoning of 1984 when the house was built. I reviewed this plan with regard to Article· 10. The criteria for an Area Variance are as follows. 1) Are their special circumstances applying to the property and building and not applying generally to other properties or buildings in the neighborhood? The applicant states that the property was developed with setbacks in force in 1984. The house has been aligned with the lakeshore rather than the road way so there is less property available for setback conformance. Z) Would the strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of the land or buildings? No. The applicant currently has reasonable use of the land and buildings. page 1 of Z -- Area Variance No:-55-1990 3) Would the strict application of the dimensional requirements result in a specified practical difficulty? No. There are alternatives. If the port for the boat was removed, there would not be any need. for a lakeshore variance. If the size of the garage were reduced to one stall, there would be no need for a side yard variance. There is no practical difficulty created by the Ordinance. The applicant would still require a variance from Section 7.074(2) (10 foot separation distance between principal and accessory structures). 4) Would this variance be materially detrimental to the purposes of the Ordinance? No. 5) Is the request minimal relief? The Board will have to judge what is minimal relief. The applicant does have a difficulty because of the Ordinance change. However, they can place a one car garage on the property with a 4 foot variance from the standard. LA Y Ised page 2 of 2 "f -...----- ~ ~1 - -- '--' TOWN OF QUEENSBURY pt_wuñ-. Department WNOTE TO FILEw Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: September 19. 1990 By: Stuart G. Baker \ X Area VariaDce - u. VariaDce - Sip VariaDce == mtel'pfttatiaa ~ _ Sketch. _ PrelimiDary, Site PlaIa Rniew - PetitioD fm- a ChaDge of Zoae - Freshwater Wet1aDda Permit FiDal Other: AppHcatiaa Number: Area Variance No. 66-1990 AppHc:aDt'. Name: Rita Wolfe MeetiDø Date: September 19, 1990 ............................................................................................ The applicant is requesting a variance from the requirement for frontage upon a public street (Section 7.077 of the Ordinance) in order to be able to build a single family home. The property is located at the very end of the Town owned right of way. Although the tax map shows the Town road extending past the applicant's property, this section of the road was never dedicated over to the Town. If a variance is granted, it will be necessary for the applicant to obtain an easement from the actual owner of this "paper road" for access to the Town road. I have reviewed the application in accordance with the criteria listed in Article 10 of the Ordinance, and I have the following comments: 1. This property is a legal lot which has been in existence prior to the adoption of the CUJ:Tent Zoning Ordinance. Strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance would deny the applicant of the right to build on this lot. Z. Inability to 'þuild OD a legally existing lot due to lack of road frontage, should be considered a practical difficulty. 3. Approval of this variance would not be detrimental to the purpose of the Ordinance, or to the neighboring properties in this zone. Approval of the variance would not conflict with the policies and strategies outlined in the Master Plan. Tbe variance requested is the minimal relief necessary to alleviate the applicant's practical difficulty. 4. Public facilities and services would not be adversely affected. SGB/sed .....--.-- ~ .. - -- - TOWN OF QUEENSBURY Planni..g Department -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: By: September 14. 1990 Stuart G. Baker x Area VariaDce Use Variance - Sign Variance == Interpretation Subdi'risioD: _ Sketch, _ PrelimiDary. Site Plan R~ew - Petition for a ChaDge of Zone - Freshwater WetlaDda Permit Final Other: Application Number: Area Variance No. 67-1990 Applicant's Name: Irene Morgan MeetiDg Date: September 19. 1990 ............................................................................................ The applicant is proposing demolishing the existing sumtn.er camp and constructing a year round residence in its place. The proposed house \-TÍll have 1,344 sq. ft. of interior living space, ±197 sq. ft. of porch, and a 392 sq. ft. front deck. (Total = ±1,933 sq. ft.) The applicant is requesting a variance from the side yard setback requirements of the WR-IA zone. Setbacks requested are 8 ft. minimum from the southeast lot line, and 16 ft. minimum from the northwest line for a total of 24 ft. minimum. The ordinance requires a minimum of 20 ft. on each side and a total of 50 ft. for both sides. I have reviewed the application accordin8 to the criteria in Article 10 of the Ordinance, and I havé the following comments: I) The average lot width for this parcel is ±.62. 5 ft. This is the smallest average lot width of any of the parcels in this neighborhood. Strict application of tbe ordinance would prohibit any construction in a new footprint. Strict application would not, however, prohibit the applicant from building a year round residence in the existing footprint. 2) Strict application of the dimensional requirements would not allow the applicant to build with setbacks similar to these of other homes in the neighborhood. The purpose of enforcing the ordinance is to improve the appearances of densely developed neigbborhoods, not to allow continued crowded development. -1- .----- \ I t -- -' 3) The purpose of waterfront residential zoning is two-fold: to protect the ecology of Glen Lake, and to discourage development that is detrimental to the visual character of the shoreline. While the proposed year round residence should not adversely affect the Glen Lake ecology, the proposed setbacks will add to the already cluttered appearance of the shoreline at this end of the lake. A specific practical difficulty must be found before minimal relief can be determined. It appears that other site design alternatives may be available that would provide the saMe square footage of interior living space while allowing for more minimal relie f from the side setback requirements of this zone. 4) The proposed variance would not affect public facilities and services. SB/pw r _ .---_.----- - --.-_. ~ t. - --- - TOWN OF QUEENSBURY PJSlnni..g Department -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: September 18, 1990 By: John Goralski Area Variance --r Use Variance - Sip Variance == Interpretation Other: SubdiWlioa: Sketch, _ Pre1iminary, Site Plan ReYÏew - Petition for a CbaDge of Zone - Freshwater WetlaDda Permit FiDal AppJicatiOD Number: Use Variance No. 68-1990 AppJic:aDt'. Name: James M. Weller MeetiDg Date: September 19, 1990 ............................................................................................ The applicant wishes to locate a wholesale business, a light industry use, in a Highway Commercial zone. It is my understanding that the mmer has been attempting to sell this parcel for a permitted use for some time. Evidence should be presented to support this statement. It does not appear that this parcel is unique within the zone. However, this area is surrounded by light industrial zones. The development of this site for a wholesale use wo~ld be in keeping with the neighborhood character. JG/pw ------.-. -- - \'\U;Wt, . \,¡IWiJ I,\\w,r '~\1~"'\' I\~\\\II\')' 11\\\i¡I.,.\!,,~ ~ ; ~ I, I, \ 1\' I'll' \ \ I¡.JI" ' \,'¡',\ ,!, J. M.Weller Associates,Inc, UPPER ""V RO'O . P.O. ""X ..,. . GLENS ..u.s. NV ,...' · pHONE .,8-,93-"" _w..._ Mr. John S. oorals1d, Town of QUeen.bUrY 531 Bay ROad Q\1een.bUrY, 11- york ~~~\I 0- Planner E~l~!' -.ANNING & ZONIN'- "EPARTMENT september 10, 1990 12304-9125 Re: APplication for variance r.". VeJ>b project - Tax HaP 110-4-1.2 Dear John, 1 have at.t.acbed a coPY of t.wo let.ters ,,¡doh 1 recent.lY received. 1. it. _ropriate for _ to present. thO"" let.ter t.o the ZC>J>in9 øoard clurin9 thO _t.in9 on sapt.- 19th or 18 it. bet.ter to have the ori9iD&tor. of the let.t.er1I appear at. thO _t.11\91 SincerelY, 1Jj,ry(~ s M. weller, P.'I· " /bn -------' \ , . ------ --- --..--- WOODLAND REAL EST A TE 77 MAIN STREET GLENS FALLS. NY 12801 (518) 792-5794 WI IrSa September 5, 1990 To: James M. Weller P.~. J.M. Weller Assoc. Inc Upper Bay Road Glens Falls, New Yor~ RE: Tax Map #110-4-1.2 Deed Ref. Book 682 Page 5101 Date: 6-27-86 Joseph Roulier, Owner Regarding the above captioned parcel of property located at Highland Avenue, Queensbury, New York: Our real estate office has actively marketed this listing over the last 15 mont~s by several methods: sign on property, co-broke with other real estate offices, news- paper advertising in local, capital district, and metro- politan New York City newspapers. To date, we have received one offer on said property from the F.W.Webb Company of Glens Falls, New York. It is our opinion that we are dealingg with a parcel of land that is obviously suited to special use, and not gener- ally marketable under ordinary circumstances. Yours Truly 1 .. . / t:. / ./ ..J II J -' ''I ; ., '. ,.., /,I1~ , , II ",-,,' ~ " .. Marianne Facklam Realtor , . - - Joseph Roulier Kattskill Bay, New York September 5, 1990 To: James M. Weller P.E. J.M. Weller Assoc. Inc. Upper Bay Road Glens Falls, New York RE: Tax Map #110 4-1.2 Deed Ref. Book 682 Page 5101 Date: 6-27-86 Since 1986 I have owned the ~bove captioned property located at Highland Avenue, Queensbury. I have attempted to sell this property since I have owned it. I have worked. with a real estate office and also have tried to sell the property privately. The only offer I have received for the property has been from the F.W.Webb Company of Glens Falls,New York. Very truly yours, , /' --- --- -, '\ Joseph Roulier ( , -.--------- _.~-- ! ¡ ~