Loading...
1990-12-19 '- Interpretation No. 2-90 RE: Dunham's Bay Boat Company, Inc. Notice of Appeal No. 5-90 Area Variance No. 94-1990 Area Variance No. 95-1990 Area Variance No. 96-1990 Area Variance No. 88-1990 --- QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 19TH, 1990 INDEX Requested By: Gilbert O. Boehm, John Salvador, Earl Shortsleeves, etal. 1. RE: Zoning Administrator's interpretation on the Hogan Site Plan No. 76-90 16. Howard M. Toomey 18. Karen J. Witte Owner: Norman and Helen Ferguson 23. C.R. Bard 26. Timothy Barber Owner: Dick and Sue Rourke 29. THESE ARE NOT OFFICIAllY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WIll ON THE FOllOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. -- QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 19TH, 1991 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT THEODORE TURNER, CHAIRMAN SUSAN GOETZ, SECRETARY JEFFREY KELLEY BRUCE CARR MICHAEL SHEA CHARLES SICARD JOYCE EGGLESTON DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY-KARLA CORPUS ZONING ADMINISTRATOR-PAT COLLARD SENIOR PLANNER-LEE YORK STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI OLD BUSINESS: INTERPRETATION NO. 2-90 INTERPRETATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE WITH REFERENCE TO QUICK LAUNCH FACILITIES. THIS PERTAINS DIRECTLY TO THE DUNHAM'S BAY BOAT COMPANY. INC. BOAT STORAGE FACILITY. REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION BY: GILBERT O. BOEHM, JOHN SALVADOR, EARL SHORTSLEEVES. MILDRED WOODIN. AND JOHN SCHRINER. 1. IS A BOAT STORAGE FACILITY THE SAME OR PART OF A MARINA? 2. IS A QUICK LAUNCH FACILITY THE SAME OR PART OF A BOAT STORAGE FACILITY? 3. IS A QüICK LAUNCH FACILITY OR MARINA FOR BOAT SALES ALLOWABLE IN A 42 ACRE ZONE IN QUEENSBURY? TAX MAP NO. 10-1-19.2 SPECIAL USE PERMIT NO. 35 GRANTED: 11/15/72 JOHN SCHRINER, PRESENT MR. TURNER-And we have a letter requesting that interpretation. Could you read that into the record? MRS. GOETZ-Read letter from Mildred Woodin, Earl Shortsleeves, John Salvador, Gilbert Boehm, and John Schriner, to Mrs. Lee York, dated September 25th, 1990 (attached) MR. TURNER-I will now open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED JOHN SCHRINER MR. SCHRINER-My name is John Schriner and what I would like to know is mainly on the sales part of this thing. It's been detennined that it's not legal to have a sales lot on this 42 acres, but the point I'm trying to get across is a salesman still takes customers up there, shows them boats. Sometimes he takes them. Sometimes he sends them on their own. We don't want this traffic and we don't feel that it should be allowed for him to take them up. This is not a sales lot and he shouldn't be taking customers up there showing them boats. Dave Hatin's interpretation was, since the money doesn't change hands up at the lot it's not considered a sales lot. Well, I disagree with this and this is our main point, we want to cut down on this traffic. MR. TURNER-All right. I think we have some questions. MR. CARR-Just for the record, you have seen salesmen showing boats on that lot? MR. SCHRINER-Yes, I have. MR. CARR-Okay. MR. TURNER-Do they park their car at the marina and walk across the road or take their car up there? How do they get up there? MR. SCHRINER-Sometimes the salesman will take his own private vehicle with a customer with him. Sometimes they'll follow him up. Sometimes they go up on their own, being sent up because I've stopped a number of cars and have been told that they were sent up there by the salesman to look at certain boats that were up for sale and this is not the end of it. What happens then, after the people see the boat they come back after hours. The Boat Company is closed. We still have the traffic going up the road. I stopped a few cars last summer and previous summers. They said that they looked at a boat in the day time and they wanted to show their friends the boat that they were thinking about buying. So we have continuous traffic going up and down this road in individual sales. 1 -- ~. MRS. GOETZ-Is it a private road? MR. SCHRINER-Yes. MR. SICARD-Yes, is the road posted? MR. SCHRINER-Yes, it is. It's a right-of-way road for the Boat Company. They have the use of it, but it is on private property. MR. SICARD-But is it posted? MR. SCHRINER-Is it posted? MR. SICARD-For no trespassing? MR. SCHRINER-We've got signs up that read, Unauthorized Personnel Not Allowed, like this, Private Property. It's not posted. The land isn't posted. MR. SICARD-Possibly, then, this wouldn't deter somebody that's interested in spending $100,000 from driving up that road and looking at a boat, would it, just to say unauthorized or something. It would seem to me that if it said No Trespassing then I'd agree. Certainly, nobody should go up there, if somebody signed that to the fact that they should not go up there. Probably these people are just assuming that they're buying an expensive boat or something, they'd like to have somebody see it. MR. SCHRINER-Very possible, but that doesn't help our point of stopping all this traffic. Are you saying that the land would have to be posted to stop them? MR. SICARD-No. I'm saying that if I was buying a boat and I wished to show it to my wife and I was spending that kind of money and she couldn't get up there only, let's say, after hours, five or six o'clock at night, that I wouldn't think that that would deter me from going up there, unless the people that owned the land, or, I can't see any way of stopping this kind of thing. MR. SCHRINER-Except that the road is not for the public's use. It's a private road. MR. SICARD-But I wouldn't know that. MR. SCHRINER-You wouldn't take it from the signs that are there that say Unauthorized Personnel? MR. SICARD-That's why I asked you if it was posted against no trespassing. Certainly, if it had a sign like that I wouldn't go up there. MR. SCHRINER-There's a sign right at the entrance, Private Property, and there's a sign on, probably 50 feet up into the road, on the bend, that the road is just for authorized people. MR. SHEA-When you say all this traffic, can you better characterize and describe the volume of traffic at different times of the year and the number of cars up there, because you say all this traffic. That's a very wide description of the amount of cars that are up there. MR. SCHRINER-That's understandable, but we kept track of the different types of traffic, not individual people looking to look at a boat. I couldn't tell you how many go up. MR. SHEA-Is it one car a day, five cars a day, ten cars a day? MR. SCHRINER-I wouldn't be able to answer you that because I don't sit there all day and look for it. I can give you an example. The reason this is fresh in my mind, we went through this. The Boat Company has just been allowed, from the Planning Board, for an additional 70 some boats and trailers and six days after they sent a letter of how they were going to cut down on the private thing, I stopped five cars within an hour. Three of the cars were sent up there by a salesman, Bob Salter his name was, and the other two, one fella came up there because he stored his trailer there all summer and he came up to pick it up and the fifth car told me he was an employee of the Boat Company's from Rutland, Vermont. So, I mean, this was five cars within the hour. Three of them were people looking at boats. MR. SHEA-Okay, but you have to understand that we're trying to ascertain the, apparently you're annoyed by the amount of traffic on this road. MR. SCHRINER-Right. MR. SHEA-Aside from whether it is legal or not legal, right or wrong, we're trying to gain a sense of how annoying it is to the people that live on that road. When you say all that traffic, it would be very helpful to you and to us in making any decision this evening or at any point in knowing the volume of traffic. Obviously, it does not occur during the winter months, correct? 2 '- '--" MR. SCHRINER-No. Well. we're not there during the winter months. We wouldn't know if it did or not. MR. SHEA-Okay. so it probably does not occur during the fall months. MR. SCHRINER-I don't know what you call fall months? September? MR. SHEA-September, October, November. MR. SCHRINER-September. there's still. This was in September, I just quoted you the five vehicles. MR. SHEA-October and November? MR. SCHRINER-I don't know. We're not there. MR. SHEA-Okay. The spring months? MR. SCHRINER-Starting in April. MR. SHEA-Okay. but I'm trying to tell you that if you could better describe the volume of traffic, to better describe the difficulty that you're having. I think we could probably gain a better sense of your predicament. MR. SCHRINER-Maybe somebody else can. but I can't guess how many cars go up there. MR. SHEA-Okay. but that would be important. MR. SCHRINER-Because every individual day would be a different amount. It all depends on how many customers come in. Some Sunday you might see 10 customers come in. Maybe the next Sunday. you won't see one come in. I don't know. There's no way for me to tell without keeping a day to day log of how often a salesman goes up there. MR. SHEA-Okay. MR. CARR-Mike, I don't think that volume is the issue. I mean. if it's allowed there could be 100 cars. MR. TURNER-That's right. MR. CARR-If it's not allowed. one car's too many. MR. SICARD-Who maintains that road? MR. SCHRINER-Nobody is. right now. The Boat Company has scraped it. over the years. We used to take care of it ourselves. MR. SICARD-But the Boat Company scraps it. Who plows it. now? MR. SCHRINER-They are plowing it. For the snow you say? MR. SICARD-Yes. MR. SCHRINER-They plow it. MR. SICARD-And they do maintain it, if there's a large hole or something? MR. SCHRINER-Well. there's a lot of holes in it right now. They've come to an agreement on this last thing that they got from the Planning Board that they were going to maintain it. I mean. they were supposed to take care of it from 1972. They were going to blacktop it, too, but we never saw the blacktop. That's 18 years ago. MR. SICARD-Nonnally the person that owns the piece of property and has a road like that. they maintain it. It would seem that they have jurisdiction over it. I mean. that's always the way I've seen it. if they maintain it. It's like the Town. If the Town maintains a road. they nonnally assume jurisdiction over the road. Snow plowing doesn't count. but maintaining it really does. You don't maintain somebody else's road. MR. SCHRINER-Well, you couldn't expect the private owners to maintain the road that they're wrecking. MR. SICARD-Well, that's why I was just trying to find out who maintains this or who owns it. MR. SCHRINER-Right. 3 '- ...-' MR. TURNER-How many other people have access to that road? MR. SCHRINER-I would say the only other ones that I know of would be one. That would be Gary Bannon. He owns property up there. MR. SICARD-This road has been used for many years and I assume you know that. Personally, I hate to say it, but I used it about 40 years ago when Dr. Fielding had a camp up there. George Fielding was a dentist there and I know at that time quite a few people used that road to go back and forth. They had a lot of old boats up there and I went up there one day, interested in buying a boat and this goes back over 40 years. MR. SCHRINER-Well, it's before any time that I got involved with it, but I don't ever recall there boats being up in there and I've been going there since '63. MR. SICARD-I do because they were there and I know George Fielding objected to that road at that time. MR. SCHRINER-Who owned the boats then? Did that Allen own them? MR. SICARD-That was prior to the fellow that runs the nursing home. MR. SCHRINER-It had to be Allen's, then. MR. SICARD-Yes. It was Allen's. MR. SCHRINER-I never knew that he ever stored up there. MR. SICARD-Well, that road was there at that time. MR. SCHRINER-Mr. Shortsleeves might be able to answer that. Do you ever remember boats being stored up there? EARL SHORTSLEEVES MR. SHORTSLEEVES-No, sir. MR. SCHRINER-He's been there since 1938. MR. SICARD-This was around 40 years ago. Dr. Fielding objected to that road at that time. MR. KELLEY-Who actually owns the property? MR. SCHRINER-Mr. Shortsleeves. He owns 90 percent of the right-of-way road and Mrs. Woodin owns probably the other 10 percent. MR. TURNER-How many people have easements on that road? MR. SCHRINER-What do you mean by easements? MR. TURNER-Who has the right to use that road besides Mr. Shortsleeves and Mr. Bannon, who else? MR. SCHRINER-Mrs. Woodin and the Boat Company. MR. SICARD-Did Don Pensel use that road? MR. SCHRINER-Did he? MR. SICARD-Yes. MR. SCHRINER-Not to my knowledge. I can remember when he had the Marina, but I never saw him up in there. That road was all grown up when I went there in '63. MR. SICARD-Well, maybe you could hear the other side of it. MR. TURNER-Any further questions of Mr. Schriner? Okay. Thank you. MR. SCHRINER-Thank you. MR. TURNER-Who wishes to be heard next? Mr. Salvador, do you want to speak on it? JOHN SALVADOR 4 '- --' MR. SALVADOR-We're here concerning the interpretation of a quick launch. MR. TURNER-Okay, we'll give the other side a chance. Does Dunham's Bay Boat Company wish to answer? Make a statement? WALTER REHM MR. REHM-Hi. I'm Walter Rehm. I represent Dunham's Bay Boat Company. As I understand this, tonight, this is an interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance that the Board has been asked to detennine how the law applies to this particular circumstance. I will tell you a couple of things about the road. The road, as Mr. Schriner mentioned, is owned by Mrs. Woodin and Mr. Shortsleeves. However, there is and has for many years been an easement that currently is owned by the Dunham's Bay Boat Company. That easement is just a general easement to use the road with no restrictions whatsoever. There are no restrictions that would indicate that only, for example, Boat Company Personnel can use the road. Because it's a general easement anyone that Dunham's Bay Boat Company designates has a legal right to use the road. Just as if one of you had a driveway right-of-way to your house, crossing someone else's land, and there were no restrictions on the deed on the use of that. If that were the case, then you would be entitled to invite me or to invite the oil man or the milk man or anyone else to use that road and as long as the use is reasonable. That is that as long as there is no speeding, no unsafe use of the road. It's perfectly legal and that's exactly what occurs here. As far as sales are concerned, sales are a difficult thing to define and they're not, as I look at the Zoning Ordinance, not terribly well defined in the Zoning Ordinance. That is not a location for the sale of boats, but there are used boats and there are new boats up that are stored in this area which, if you've seen the property, is some di stance from 9L and once in a whi 1 e someone goes up and looks at a boat as was described. It may be an individual is interested in a boat or it may be a situation where, after hours or on weekends, someone wants to drive up and take a look at the status of their boat which is stored up there, that's perfectly legal as far as use of this right-of-way is concerned. The question is, is it legal as far as the Zoning Ordinance is concerned. I think you can state categorically that the actual sale, running a sales operation up there is not legal. This is an LC-42 zone and I think there's no question that that's not legal. On the other hand, common sense has to come into play in situations like this and we have just been through months and months of meetings and negotiations and so on, including dealing with the Planning Board. The Planning Board has just approved the current use that exists up there and one of the great issues was moving boats back and forth 9L and it just seems to me that if boats are going to be on this property and they legally are on this property, it makes a lot more sense for a consumer to walk up the road or drive up the road and look at a boat than it makes to send equipment up, put the boat on a trailer, drag it all the way down the road, across 9L to the Marina and have them look at the boat and then move the thing back. There are lots of places in the Town of Queensbury where sales are not allowed, for example, in a residential zone, but there's nothing to prevent someone from looking, as long as it's not a wholesale comrrercial operation or a sales office, there's nothing to prevent these casual types looking at something that's for sale. It is done, not commonly. I don't know if it was Mr. Schriner or who it was, but at the initial Planning Board meeting, a traffic count on this road was given to the Planning Board and is part of the Planning Board files and so if that infonnation is of interest to you, that is available in the Planning Board files and what you'll find is that there really isn't much traffic on this road on a daily basis and that traffic count was taken by the individuals that submitted it. If there's anything else I can answer. There's no quick launch. I'll tell you that. There is no quick launch. A quick launch is clearly defined in the Zoning Ordinance and it does not exist. MR. SICARD-Is the pennit to use that road available, the original document? MR. REHM-What it is is a deed and when the, I've got a copy of it here, property was purchased, in the deed, the language says together with the right-of-way 20 feet in width from this parcel to State Highway 9L known as the Fort George Brayton connecting Highway. That's all there is. MR. SICARD-I don't want to see it. I just wanted to see what the interpretation was there. MR. REHM-Would the Board like to have a copy of this? MR. TURNER-No. I don't think it's necessary. MR. REHM-If there are legal problems with the use of the road that are outside the Zoning Ordinance, this is not the forum to resolve that, but if you've seen the Planning Board proceedings on this you will know that a great deal of effort has occurred on the half of the Howards to try to mitigate any impacts from the use of this road to the extent that they can. It's still a road that's traveled and it's used and it's perfectly legal. MR. TURNER-Okay. Thank you. MR. REHM-Thank you. MR. SCHRINER-Could I ask one question please? I'm not very familiar with the laws, but I was always on the assumption that an easement had to be signed, to give someone an easement, it had to be signed by a property owner. Am I wrong in this assumption? 5 "---' -- MR. TURNER-I can't answer you that. Karla? MR. SCHRINER-I mean, Mr. Rehm said that they have an easement. Is this correct? MR. REHM-Yes. MR. SCHRINER-Well, who did the easement come from? MR. REHM-Probably the easement has existed for many years. I don't have a title search, but this deed is from Virginia Allen to Dunham's Bay Company which was in January of 1973. Whether Allen was the original owner of that property, I don't know and I've never looked at the title to the property, but I know that Dunham's Bay Boat Company was conveyed an easement by Mrs. Allen. Beyond that, I can't say. MR. SCHRINER-In other words then, it's really not an easement. Is this true? MR. CARR-No. If they've got it in the record, the record title, Warren County, if there is an easement from the owner of the property. MR. SCHRINER-But she didn't own the property, that's what I'm saying. MR. CARR-Well, at what time? Did she ~ own it? MR. SCHRINER-She never owned that property. This is why I'm saying this. MR. CARR-Well, that would be a defect in title and, I mean, that's something that maybe you want to research. MR. REHM-That's exactly right. As you know, it may well be that some place back before our time someone conveyed to Mrs. Allen an easement over that particular roadway. She owned the easement and combined it with the land that she owned and then conveyed it to Dunham's Bay Boat Company. There are all kinds of possibilities here and I suppose that if I were objecting to this, one of the things I'd do is research that issue. MR. TURNER-Okay. Does anyone else wish to speak? All right, the public hearing is closed. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MS. CORPUS-If I could ask a couple of questions of the Board and maybe make a clarification. This item is being heard again because it was not properly noticed the last time the Board heard it. Under Article 12 of the Zoning Ordinance and Section 267 of the Town Law, the Board cannot make interpretations. It can only, it can be appealed to from an order of, in this case the Zoning Administrator and in that, I believe it was Dave Hatin's letter that was being appealed. I would make a recommendation, first, that that be read into the record and that the Board make it's decisions based upon that letter. MRS. GOETZ-Who was the letter to? MR. TURNER-It was Dave Hatin's letter. MRS. GOETZ-To who? Because there's one in here to Mr. Connolly. Who was the letter to? MR. TURNER-To us, I think. MRS. GOETZ-Read letter from David Hatin, To John Schriner, dated September 20th, 1990 MR. TURNER-Let's take them (the questions) one at a time. Is a Boat Storage Facility the same or part of a Marina? Does anybody have a problem with that? MR. CARR-It can be. It doesn't have to be. MR. KELLEY-It could be part of a marina, but it doesn't have to be. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. SHEA-Dave Hatin's determination is yes, it is. MR. TURNER-Yes, it is. MR. SHEA-And I would agree with that. MR. TURNER-I would, too. 6 -- MR. CARR-Well, I don't because a boat storage facility can be on any lot in the Town of Queensbury, provided zoning, but a marina can only be on a waterfront lot. MR. SHEA-But the question is, is the Boat Storage facility the same or part of a marina. The answer has to be yes. MR. KELLEY-It could be part of the marina. MR. TURNER-It could be part. MR. SHEA-The answer to that question as stated has to be yes. MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. SHEA-And it reinforces Dave's position. MR. CARR-Wait a minute, is 2.. Boat Storage facility. Anyone? Are we talking about a specific one or are we talking about the question? MR. SICARD-Are you talking about quick launch, now? MR. TURNER-No. MR. SHEA-This doesn't say a specific one. It's talking about a generalization to determine a definition. MR. CARR-Right. Is a Boat Storage facility the same or part of a marina, and yes it can be, but not necessarily has to be. MR. SICARD-What is a marina? MR. CARR-The waterfront property. MR. SICARD-With boats. MR. CARR-With boats. MR. SHEA-That are stored from time to time. MR. CARR-That's right. MR. SHEA-So, the answer is yes. MR. CARR-No, but a Boat Storage facility doesn't have to be waterfront. It's in the definition. MR. SICARD-That's right. MR. CARR-Right. So, it £!!l be. It doesn't have to be part of a marina. I think we're agreeing, but I'm just not saying that it has to be part of a marina. MR. SHEA-And I'm not qualifying it. MR. CARR-Okay. MR. SHEA-All I'm doing is, I agree with Dave Hatin's interpretation and I think that's what we're here for. MR. CARR-Okay. Good. MR. KELLEY-I agree, too. MRS. GOETZ-We better quit wasting time and move on because you do agree with what's been said. MR. TURNER-Okay. Is a Quick Launch Facility the same or part of a Boat Storage Facility? MR. KELLEY-I'll agree with Dave on that and say no. MR. TURNER-No. MR. SICARD-The Quick Launch is something that's comparatively new, isn't it? MR. TURNER-Yes. 7 '- -/ MR. SICARD-So, these marinas have been around for years with boat storage facilities, but no quick 1 aunch. MR. TURNER-Right. MR. SICARD-And up until either after zoning came in in '68, they still operated with just boat storage facilities. Quick launches were comparatively new where they stacked them up. Fisher Marina has one and there's some over in Bolton landing there's a couple. I think a Quick launch, really, in my classification, would be part of a Boat Storage. It's a barn or so forth that they put boats in. It's just the operation of getting the boat in and out that makes it a Quick launch. It's a Boat Storage Facility. When the boat gets in the Quick launch Barn it's a Boat Storage Facility. It becomes a Quick launch when you put it in and take it out quick, as this was done, of course, to preserve lake front property and make it more usable to the owners of marinas. MR. SHEA-Mr. Hatin, in his letter, in answer to Question Number Two, Is a Quick launch Facility the same or part of a Boat Storage Facility? He says that it is not, okay. I would disagree with that. MR. SICARD-I do, too. MR. SHEA-And I would disagree with it on two points, both common sense and semantics. He said, earlier, that a Boat Storage Facility h in fact part of a Marina, which is the larger definition of all the activities involved in the commerce of storing, selling and servicing and launching boats. The Item Number Two that, when he says that a Boat Storage Facility h part of a Marina and then saying that a Quick launch Facility is part of a Boat Storage Facility, they're all the same activity, okay. They're all involved in the same kind of commerce. So, in my opinion, I would have to disagree with him on Point Number Two and say that a Quick launch Facility h part of, in this instance, a Boat Launch Facility which is in part, part of the activity of an overall marina. We're getting down to fine line semantics, here, but it is all the general same commercial activity. MR. CARR-I don't agree with that because Quick launch is clearly, it says it's got to be part of a Marina. Now, you're saying every Boat Storage Facility is part of a Marina and I disagree with that. That's a general statement. It's like you've got a Marina and then you've got two things below it. You've got a Boat Storage that.£!!l be part of it, it doesn't have to be, and you've got a Quick Launch that has to be part of a Marina if it's a Quick launch. So, it's like, you've got the Marina and inside the Marina has to be the Quick launch. If you have a Quick Launch, it has to be within a Marina, but you've got a Boat Storage, right here, it can be part, but it doesn't have to be. MR. SHEA-Can or can not be part of it. I agree. MR. CARR-So, a Quick Launch Facility is not the same as a Boat Storage Facility. MR. SHEA-It says, same or part of. MR. CARR-Well, it can be as long as a Boat Storage Facility is a part of a Marina. MRS. GOETZ-Right. MR. CARR-Marina is the key. It's got to be a Marina to be a Quick Launch Facility. MRS. GOETZ-Because of the definition of Quick launch Facility, Definition 228. MR. CARR-Right. MRS. GOETZ-It says "Means a commercial facility located within a Marina", those words. MR. CARR-Right. I mean if all it is is a Boat Storage Facility, it cannot be a Quick Launch. If it's not within the Marina, it can't be a Quick Launch Facility, if it's only boat storage. MR. TURNER-I'd agree with that. Do you see what he's saying? MRS. EGGLESTON-It makes sense. MR. TURNER-We could have a scenario where some guy could have a Boat Storage Facility on 9l. MR. SICARD-And not a Quick Launch, like Fisher. Fisher originally just tied up boats. They called that a Marina at that time, if you go back. You're familiar with that area. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. SICARD-Then they started storing boats in a Quonset hut that fell down and then later on, now, they opened up a Quick launch, but all this time it was a Boat Storage Area and it was a Marina. 8 "-' .-/ MR. CARR-That's right and that's okay. MR. TURNER-But it's within a Marina. MRS. EGGLESTON-Because it's on the water, yes. MR. TURNER-What I'm saying is, if it's off site, it's not a Quick Launch. It has to be contained within the Marina. MR. SICARD-Well, that makes sense. MR. CARR-Yes, and the Marina has to be water front property. MR. TURNER-It has to be water front property. MR. SICARD-That's right, and yet, what would you call the boat operation on 149, where he sells boats and services boats and stores boats? What do you call that? He has no water front property. He doesn't own any water front property. MR. CARR-I wouldn't call it a Marina. MR. SICARD-Would you call that a Marina? MR. CARR-No, I wouldn't. MRS. GOETZ-No. MR. SICARD-What is it? MR. EGGLESTON-Retail sales. MR. KELLEY-Retail sales. MR. SICARD-A retail sales? What about, he's got a Quick Launch Barn there. He does Quick Launch in there? MR. SHEA-Well, I'd like to go on record as saying I disagree with Point Number Two. MR. TURNER-You say a Quick Launch Facility i! the same or part of a Boat Storage Facility? MR. SHEA-That is my opinion, yes. MR. TURNER-Okay. Anyone else? Everybody else says no? Charlie, no? MR. SICARD-No. MRS. EGGLESTON-No. MRS. GOETZ-No. MR. KELLEY-I agree with Dave's interpretation of the whole thing. MR. CARR-No. MR. TURNER-I do. Okay. Number Three, Is a Quick Launch Facility or Marina for boat sales allowable in a 42 acre zone in Queensbury? No. MRS. GOETZ-You're saying no? MR. TURNER-No, it's not allowed, but when we did it the last time without having any public input we decided there wasn't enough evidence to support it. MR. SHEA-But Dave's interpretation of Number Three is, yes, that it ~ allowed, correct? MR. TURNER-I think he says no. MR. KELLEY-He says no to the first part and when does it occur detennines when the sale takes place. MR. SICARD-I think that the tenninology of boat sales has to be detennined before you can answer this question. What is a boat sale? Is it a transfer of money for property. Somebody just going up there and looking at a boat like a guy goes in and buys a car and he goes out and looks at the lot, but he doesn't buy it and when he goes to buy it he goes in the offi ce and transfers hi s money and buys it. 9 -- MR. CARR-But what do they call that lot, a sales lot. MR. SICARD-Yes, a sales lot. I think we have to make an interpretation of where the sales are transpiring. Just going up there and looking I don't think you can call it a sales lot. If you go up and look at a boat. I don't know. MR. KELLEY-I think that's what Dave's statement clarifies. MRS. GOETZ-But I don't agree with that. MRS. EGGLESTON-No, I don't either. I agree that's part of the sale. MR. CARR-Yes. I've always thought if they go up and look at a boat and you try to sell somebody a boat, even if you don't sign the papers, you're selling, that's a sales lot. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes, that's the way I feel on that. MR. TURNER-That's a sales pitch. That's not selling the boat. That's trying to ~ him to buy the boat. That's the sales pitch. MRS. GOETZ-But it's part of the whole sales effort. MR. KELLEY-Yes, but we talked about that when we talked about real estate. We said, Susan, you've got your house for sale and someone goes to look at it. Technically, you can't sell your house because you're in a residential zone. So, where does the sale take place? In a real estate office, more than likely, or bank. MRS. EGGLESTON-What about if you show that house and when you're in there she says or the person says, I'll take it. Then where's the point of sale? MR. TURNER-Where's the money? I'd say, where's the down payment. MRS. EGGLESTON-Well, arguing that then do you wait for approval from a bank? MR. TURNER-Yes, most of them do. MR. EGGLESTON-I mean, before you would say the sale, then it doesn't even take place in the.... MR. KELLEY-I mean, if you went by that strictly, in a single family residential zone, you can't have sales. It's for residential purposes only. MRS. GOETZ-I think we should look at why we're even discussing this. Obviously, the activity up there is causing some kind of attention, be it bad or good. I'm just suspecting that maybe the operation has expanded over the years. Isn't this part of another marina up north? MR. KELLEY-Yes, but we were requested for an interpretation based on Dave's letter. MRS. GOETZ-But see I think part of the sales ~ going on up there, I really do and was that part of their Special Use Permit in '72? MR. TURNER-No. MR. CARR-I guess my question would be, with the house sale analogy, I can have ten cars on my front lawn as long as I run down to an office in downtown Glens Falls and sign the papers, that's not a sales lot? I'm not selling cars out of my home? MR. TURNER-You better be in the right place. MR. KELLEY-You can't have cars on your lot. MR. CARR-Why not? MR. KELLEY-Unless they're registered in your name. In the Town of Queensbury, you've got to have a registered vehicle in your yard. MR. CARR-Well, let's use something else. I've got ten hot air balloons. MR. SICARD-Jeff, suppose there was a boat up there that was for sale, just to see the way it is. Somebody comes in and wants to see it. So, you're sayi ng he has to go up there and get that boat and bri ng it down before these people can see a boat. We're talking about an expensive boat. He deals in expensive boats. You've got a $100,000 boat stored up there and a guy says I'd like to see it. It's up on the hill. What do you say to him? We're going to go get it? 10 -- -- MR. CARR-I'm not saying it's practical. I'm just doing an interpretation of the law. If they want to apply for a variance, that's fine. MRS. EGGLESTON-But Charlie, just because it's easier to do it that way doesn't mean that's right. Just because it's easier doesn't mean that fits the zoning. MR. SICARD-But answer my question. What would ~ do if you were the owner of this marina? MRS. EGGLESTON-Well, I'd probably do what he does and if I lived there I'd hate to have him go up and bring the boats down, but that's not the question, I don't think. MR. CARR-The question is an interpretation of the Ordinance, not this particular case. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes, not this, any case. MR. CARR-And not the facts of this case, how it applies to this interpretation, but just interpret the law. MR. SICARD-I'm just curious to see what would happen in an incident such as this and I'm sure he runs up against them. MR. CARR-I would recommend that the owner apply for a variance perhaps, depending on our interpretation. MR. TURNER-All right, any other comment? MRS. EGGLESTON-I dare say if you had 100 people in a room, 50 percent would say the sale was one place and 50 the other. I don't know if you would ever come a 100 percent meeting of the minds of where the point of the sale is. MR. TURNER-I think the point of sale is when you sign the contract for the boat and the money passes from one to the other. MRS. EGGLESTON-That's what you think, but I think it's when I say I'll take it. MR. TURNER-That's down in the office and that's not up on the hill and I think anybody that has a car lot or a boat business or anything that has a display like that has a right to take the customer to that point and show him that boat whether it's over color, over size, or anything else that pertains to that sale. That is sales pitch. The sale is actually consummated when the contract is signed and the money passes. MR. SICARD-That's right. MRS. EGGLESTON-Well, I agree and for the record, I agree with one and two, but I don't agree with three. MR. CARR-I'd like to read it back one at a time. MR. TURNER-I agree. Read that part back. MRS. EGGLESTON-Back again, one at a time? MR. TURNER-Yes. MRS. GOETZ-(Reading from Dave Hatin's September 20th letter) "Your third question was "is a quick launch facility or marina for boat sales allowable in an LC42 Zone?" In answer to the first part of the question, a quick launch facility would not be allowed in an LC42 Zone because boat storage is the only pennitted use there." MR. TURNER-That's not the one I want. The one about sales. MRS. GOETZ-But it's over here, isn't it? MR. TURNER-Yes, that's the one. MRS. GOETZ-(Reading from Dave Hatin's September 20th letter) "A quick launch facility by definition must be located within a marina." "In answer to the second part of your question: "is a marina for boats sales allowable in an LC42 Zone?", I think we have to break this question apart: 1. Dunham's Bay Boat Company does store boats for sale in the boats storage facility which is allowed. 2. The next part of the question becomes "when does this sale occur". It would be my conclusion that because all transactions of paperwork and monies are conducted at the marina, that the storage of boats for sale at the boat storage facility is not a violation of the Queensbury Zoning Ordinance and therefore the boats for sale are allowed to be stored at this facility." 11 --' MR. CARR-The question is, is a marina. We've got to start with, is a marina allowed in 42 Acre Zone? MRS. GOETZ-A marina isn't allowed anywhere in any zone. MR. CARR-Then the answer is no. Quick launch and Marina are not allowed in 42 Acre Zones. MRS. GOETZ-Right. MR. CARR-That's the question. MR. SHEA-Well, he says it's not a violation. Dave Hatin says it's not a violation. MRS. GOETZ-There are preexisting marinas. MR. CARR-No. He starts talking about boat storage facilities. The question is, are marinas for boat sales? MR. SHEA-Dave Hatin says that a boat storage facility is not a violation in a 42 Acre Zone in Queensbury, correct? MR. CARR-Right. MR. SHEA-Okay and in Number One he says that a boat storage facility 1! part of a marina. MR. CARR-Then he's wrong on that because it doesn't have to be part of a marina. It can be part of a marina. It doesn't necessarily, because there's a boat storage facility doesn't necessarily mean it's a ma ri na. MRS. GOETZ-But don't we just have to answer the third question? It sounds like we're making it too complicated. MR. TURNER-We are. MRS. GOETZ-So why don't we just answer the question? MR. SHEA-Because Dave Hatin has contradicted himself between Items Number One and Number Three. MRS. GOETZ-Maybe he's done that, but why do we have to become part of it. Can't we just answer the questi on? MR. CARR-The question was about a marina. He changed it to a boat storage facility. MRS. GOETZ-So, I think the answer to Number Three is no. A quick launch facility or marina for boat sales is not allowed in an lC42 Zone in Queensbury. MRS. EGGlESTON-I agree with that. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. SICARD-I don't know. I can agree on it as far as the quick launch is concerned, but the boat sales, you're saying the boat sales? MR. CARR-No. I'm saying the marina for boat sales is not allowable in a 42 Acre Zone. MRS. EGGLESTON-Is not allowable in a 42 Acre Zone, because there are no zones with marinas. MR. TURNER-That's the question you're on, marina. MR. SICARD-Would, then, we be denying him the use of that land up there for? MR. CARR-No, he can have the boat storage facility up there. MR. SICARD-He could have a boat storage facility, despite the fact that it's been there for whatever. MR. SHEA-He can have the boat storage facility there and people can go up and look at boats. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. SHEA-Because he has an easement and a right-of-way. MR. CARR-I'm not going so far as to say that. 12 ~ - MRS. EGGLESTON-No, that's beyond us. MRS. GOETZ-I'm not saying that either. MR. CARR-That's not the question. MRS. GOETZ-No. I think we should just answer the question. MR. TURNER-Answer the question. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes, I agree with that. MR. TURNER-Is a quick launch facility or marina for boat sales allowed in a 42 Acre Zone? Yes or no? MRS. GOETZ-No. MRS. EGGLESTON-No. MR. SICARD-But you could still show boats. MRS. EGGLESTON-We're not denying him the use of it. We're just answering this question which is what is asked of us. MR. SICARD-What does my counsel say down at the end there? What do you say about this? MR. CARR-I say we don't answer that question tonight. MR. TURNER-We didn't answer it the last time. MR. CARR-That's right. We shouldn't answer it. MR. TURNER-Okay. 1'11 read it. "Is a boat storage facility the same or part of a marina?" The Board says yes. MR. CARR-Could we discuss that? MR. TURNER-That's what I've got right here, yes. MR. CARR-It's not a definitive yes. It can't be. MR. TURNER-We'll have a vote. MRS. EGGLESTON-It mayor may not be. MR. CARR-It mayor may not be. MRS. EGGLESTON-Well, couldn't we put that in our answer? MR. TURNER-Well, let's deal with the first part of that question first. Let's vote on it and then we'll chase it down. MR. SHEA-My opinion on the statement of Number One is that the answer is yes. A boat storage facility is the same or part of a marina. MR. TURNER-Charlie? MR. SICARD-I agree at that first one also. Is that the one you're talking about? Yes. MR. TURNER-Joyce? MR. EGGLESTON-Well, I have to say, if you're just saying flat out is it, the answer's no, because it can or can not be, mayor may not be. MRS. GOETZ-Yes. MR. TURNER-Jeff? MR. KELLEY-I'll say yes. I agree with Dave in the beginning. MR. TURNER-Bruce? 13 '- -' MR. CARR-Not that definitive. MR. TURNER-Five to two. MR. CARR-Okay, so now we're stuck that a boat storage i.! part of a marina. So that's going to change answer Number Three then. MRS. EGGLESTON-So what does that do to a guy with boat storage facility, say, on Corinth Road? MRS. GOETZ-Let's not worry about that right now. MR. CARR-But we've got to worry about that. MRS. EGGLESTON-We have to worry about it because we're saying for the future. MRS. GOETZ-I think that you've got boat storage definitions both private and comrrercial which would help us at a later time. That's what I've got to say on it. MS. CORPUS-If I might make a recommendation. The Board ~ tie this in specifically to this application for which the letter was written, if that would clarify that. MR. SHEA-I think it would because right now because we're locked into the... MR. TURNER-It would be better because this contradicts that in lots of respects. MR. SHEA-Right now, the Board is voting line by line on the verbiage of Dave Hatin which in my estimation is somewhat contradictory between Item Number One and Number Three and not only is it contradictory, but it's saying two things at once. It's saying, can be part of and is, which is very confusing to all of us here, along with I'm sure the public opinion in the audience here. So, maybe we could take Karla's suggestion and look at this in tenns of the situation before us, it might make more sense. MS. CORPUS-And the Board is free to use other words. MR. TURNER- Yes. MS. CORPUS-The Board can say, can be part of and in this case is, if that's what the Board feels. You can expand upon the answer to Dave, if that's what the Board wants. MRS. EGGLESTON-I would be more comfortable with that, a boat storage facility may be part of a marina. MR. CARR-We can just say can be part of a marina. MRS. GOETZ-I think we should say what Karla just suggested, that a boat storage facility can be and is, in this particular instance, part of a marina. MR. REHM-This is not only what you think. You've got to look at the Ordinance and the Ordinance clearly says that a marina must be a lake shore facility. If it is not on the lake shore, it is not a marina. This boat storage facility is not on the lake shore, so it is not a marina. MS. CORPUS-The Board is free to make that detennination if they choose, too. MR. CARR-I agree with that wholeheartedly because Marina is very clearly water front. Boat storage has nothing to do with water front. It can be, but has nothing to do, in the definition. MRS. GOETZ-And isn't that what I just said, can be? MR. TURNER- Yes. MRS. GOETZ-And is in this particular case, part of this marina? MR. CARR-I don't think is part, in this particular case, it is not part of the marina. MRS. EGGLESTON-Since it's not water front? MR. CARR-Right. It's a separate tax lot. MRS. EGGLESTON-It's across the road up in the woods, right? That's your theory? MR. CARR- Yes. MR. SICARD-What zone, then, would a storage of boats fall into if it was not on a water front property. 14 ~ - MR. CARR-Well, with a Type I, let's see, Commercial Boat Storage greater than 25 can be in a 42 Acre Zone, LC42 with Type I Site Plan Review. MR. SICARD-It would have to be in a 42 Acre Zone? MR. CARR-Type I, yes, Site Plan. MR. SICARD-So, this place on 149, then, for instance? MR. CARR-It might be grandfathered. MR. SICARD-No, it isn't. MR. CARR-It's only been there for two years? MR. SICARD-Two years, on 149 close to Route 9, George's Boats. MR. SHEA-It's been there more than two years. MR. SICARD-It hasn't been there since '68. MR. CARR-It's probably a retail sales in a Highway Commercial? MR. TURNER-They got that storage building by variance, Charlie, remember? MR. SICARD-Yes, but he has a place up on Route 9, right around the corner, where he stores boats. MRS. COLLARD-Highway Commercial permits commercial boat storage. MR. TURNER-Right. MR. SICARD-Commercial boat storage? MRS. COLLARD-Yes. MRS. EGGLESTON-Highway Commercial. MR. SICARD-Highway Commercial? MRS. COLLARD-Yes. MR. TURNER-We're going to word it, I guess, the way the Board is comfortable with it. Okay, Is a Boat Storage Facility the same or part of a Marina? MR. CARR-And what was the answer? MR. TURNER-The answer was no. We were going to re-word it. We could condition it, say it how the Board feels, what their interpretation is and that's what we're asked for. 'llTlON ON ImRPRETATlON fI). 2-90 REQUESTED BY GILBERT O. BOEHM. JOHN SALVADOR. EARL SHORTSLEEVES. MILDRED IIJODIN. AND JOHN SCHRINER. AS TO THE QUESTION OF IS A BOAT STORAGE FACILITY THE SAME OR PART OF A MARINA: A BOAT STORAGE FACILITY CAN STAND ON ITS OWN AS A BOAT STORAGE FACILITY OR IT COULD BE PART OF A MARINA., Introduced by Jeffrey Kelley who moved for its adoption, seconded by Bruce Carr: Duly adopted this 19th day of December, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Carr, Mr. Kelley, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Shea, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE 'llTlON ON INTERPRETATION JIJ. 2-90 SECOND QUESTION. AS TO IS A QUICK LAUNCH FACILITY THE SAME OR PART OF A BOAT STORAGE FACILITY: fI). AS lIAS JUST SAID. THE BOAT STORAGE FACILITY CAN STAND BY ITSELF., Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Jeffrey Kelley: Duly adopted this 19th day of December, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shea NOES: Mr. Kelley, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner 'llTlON ON INTERPRETATION fI). 2-90 THIRD QUESTION. AS TO IS A QUICK LAUNCH FACILITY OR MARINA FOR BOAT SALES ALLOWABLE IN A 42 ACRE mNE IN QUEENSBURY: JIJ., Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Bruce Carr: 15 "---' -- Duly adopted this 19th day of December, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: NONE NOES: Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Shea, Mr. Carr, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Turner MR. TURNER-Okay. Those are the items that were asked for and you have the ruling. MR. SCHRINER-Now that this is all over, I'm not sure what actually took place, but is it allowable for the salesman to go up there now with customers? MR. TURNER-That wasn't the question. MR. SCHRINER-I understand that. I'm asking you. MR. CARR-We can't answer that on the record. MR. SCHRINER-You can't answer that. Well, where do we go from here, can you tell me that? MRS. GOETZ-To the Zoning Administrator. MR. TURNER-You go to the Zoning Administrator. MR. SCHRINER-The Zoning Administrator? MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. CARR-What you've got to ask him is not, is a marina for boat sales allowable, is a boat storage facility, also, can that be used for sales, that's the question. MRS. EGGLESTON-In a 42 Acre Zone. MR. SCHRINER-And does this Zoning Administrator you're talking about happen to be Dave? MR. CARR-Yes. MR. SCHRINER-I've got to go back to him? MR. CARR-With that question, because he hasn't answered that one yet. MR. SCHRINER-Tell me, again, what the question is, because I'm not going to remember it. MR. CARR-Should we write it down? MR. SCHRINER-Yes. I'd appreciate it. NEW BUSINESS: REQUEST BY THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD FOR THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TO GIVE THEIR INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 9.0118 OF THE QUEENSBURY ZONING ORDINANCE. MR. TURNER-This is related to a piece of property owned by Michael and Martha Hogan on Glen Lake. MRS. GOETZ-Read letter from Peter J. Cartier, Vice Chainnan, Queensbury Planning Board, to Theodore Turner, Chainnan, Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals, dated October 25th, 1990 (attached) Memo from Patricia Collard, Zoning Administrator, to Stuart Baker and Planning Board members, Assistant Planner, dated October 22nd, 1990 (attached) MR. TURNER-Okay. Who wants to make the first comment? This is definitely over a 50 percent expansion, and that's the issue. MRS. GOETZ-Well, I think the issue is whether or not one expansion can take place first. MR. TURNER-No, because I think it's a rebuilding. "The commencement of the first enlargement", there's no enlargement. They're tearing the camp down. They're going to rebuild it. MRS. GOETZ-But it ~ a rebuilding. MR. TURNER-It's a total rebuilding. MR. CARR-Yes, but it says that, "immediately prior to the commencement of the first enlargement, or rebuilding". 16 --../ "--" MRS. EGGLESTON-"Or rebuilding", this is rebuilding so it would require a variance. MR. TURNER-That's what I'm saying. MRS. GOETZ-We probably goofed when we had that first variance. We should have picked up on it. We didn't have the square footage then? MR. TURNER-I don't think we had the square footage. The request was only for relief for frontage on a public highway. MRS. GOETZ-It seems like we had the square footage. MRS. EGGLESTON-We knew it was going to be two story and rebuilt in the same footprint. I can't remember if we had the square footage, but this seems pretty clear. MR. TURNER-Yes, you're right. MRS. GOETZ-Again, we shouldn't try to get into every aspect. I think we should just answer the question of the interpretation. MR. TURNER- Yes. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes. MRS. GOETZ-And I feel that it's the first expansion or rebuilding that you have to bring this into the play, the 50 percent. MR. TURNER-Yes. MRS. GOETZ-So, I think the wrong interpretation or decision was made by the Zoning Administrator. MRS. EGGLESTON-I agree with that. MR. KELLEY-I was just looking at the application to see what was mentioned on there, you know, the original application. MRS. GOETZ-I think, again, you have to go back to why was the Zoning Ordinance written this way and it's common sense. You want control over expansion and rebuilding and why would you let one expansion or rebuilding go on before you started to take a look at it? Do you remember when it was rewritten and all of that? What do you think? MR. TURNER-I agree with this wholeheartedly, that that's what the intent was, but, let me say this. I don't know, Pat, did you see the building, see elevation drawings or anything? MRS. COLLARD-I don't recall. I really don't recall. MR. TURNER-If she didn't see them, if they weren't presented to her, she had no way of knowing that there was going to be more than 50 percent. They just came in and said, we're going to rebuild a camp and we're not on a public road and we need a variance. If they don't present their paperwork so that she can make the decision, this is what's going to happen. They've got to come with all their paperwork, elevation drawings and everything, so that she can make a definitive decision as to what's required. MRS. EGGLESTON-But they went from a one story to a two story. MR. TURNER-Yes, right. MRS. EGGLESTON-Didn't they? So, that's like a 100 percent expansion, really. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. EGGLESTON-And we've had that in front of us, when, we knew it was going to be two story last time it came before us. MR. KELLEY-Right. MRS. COLLARD-I have to tell you, in all honesty, even if they had brought in showing the second story, I did not understand this Section of the Ordinance. MRS. GOETZ-Which is fine. If you didn't understand it, that's, I mean, we all make mistakes, right? MRS. COLLARD-Right. 17 ~ MRS. GOETZ-But I think it's good to get it cleared now because it's going to happen over and over. MRS. COLLARD-Exactly. By the way, it ~ being rewritten. MRS. GOETZ-Is it? MRS. COLLARD-And it's going to be very clear. MRS. GOETZ-Good. That will be a help. Now, since this was not picked up originally, at the time of the other variance, do they have to come in for this part of it before they can build? MRS. COLLARD-I'd have to defer that to Counsel. I mean, it has received a variance from 280 A. The Planning Board has approved it. MR. TURNER-Has approved it, yes. MS. CORPUS-It would jeopardize those approvals, yes. MRS. EGGLESTON-But would it have to be done? MS. CORPUS-Yes. MRS. EGGLESTON-They would have to come back for a variance? MS. CORPUS-Yes. MR. TURNER-No. The Planning Board has already approved it. It's going to jeopardize their approval. MS. CORPUS-Yes. MRS. GOETZ-But I don't think!! should be concerned with that. MR. TURNER-Okay. MRS. GOETZ-We should just be concerned with answering the question. MRS. EGGLESTON-Right. MR. TURNER-All right. Okay, lets answer it and get on with things. fØTION ON MJTICE OF APPEAL 10. 5-90 REQUESTED BY THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BUARD REGARDING THE DECISION OF THE lONING AIIHNISTRATOR IN THE MATTER OF THE HOGAN SITE PLAN MJ. 76-90. lIE DISAGREE WITH THE lONING ADMINISTRATOR'S INTERPRETATIOI OF SECTION 9.011B, AS IT PERTAINS TO SITE PLAN ffO. 16-90. I FEEL THAT, IN REFERENCE TO SITE PLAN 10. 16-90 MICHAEL AND MARTHA HOGAN, THAT MJ ENLARGEMEIIT OR REBUILDING SHALL EXCEED AN AGGREGATE OF 50 PERCENT OF THE GROSS FLOOR AREA OF SUCH SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING OR fØBILE OOME, IMMEDIATELY PRIOR 10 THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE FIRST ENLARGEMENT OR REBUILDING. , Introduced by Susan Goetz who moved for its adoption, seconded by Theodore Turner: Duly adopted this 19th day of December, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Carr, Mr. Kelley, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Shea, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE MR. SICARD-Sue, are you also saying that we'll have to hear this over? MRS. GOETZ-I don't think we have to answer that question. MR. SICARD-No? Okay. AREA VARIANCE MJ. 94-1990 TYPE II IIR-lA HOWARD M. TOOMEY OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE flJRTH ON SUNNYSIDE ROAD, ACROSS FROM ROCKWELL ROAD TO CONSTRUCT A DECK FROM AN EXISTING PLATFORJt AND CONSTRUCT A RAILING AROUND THE SAME OF APPROXIMATELY 540 SQ. FT. DOES flJT MEET SHORELINE SETBACK REQUIREMENT. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP MJ. 54-3-20 LOT SIZE: 2.43 ACRES SECTION 4.020 D STAFF INPUT Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner (attached) MR. TURNER-Kevin, are you going to represent the application? 18 -- ~ MRS. GOETZ-What exactly are they asking for? MR. TURNER-It's on the base of the old pavilion. MRS. GOETZ-There's a deck that's way out, or a dock. MR. TURNER-No. MRS. GOETZ-It's not anything to do with the one that's way out? MR. TURNER-No. MRS. GOETZ-It's up close to the road? MR. TURNER-Yes. Do you know where the steel beams are that go horizontal to the road? MRS. GOETZ- Yes. MR. TURNER-It's right out there. MRS. GOETZ-What exactly is the variance request in measurements, that they're asking for? MR. TURNER-It's a shoreline setback. MRS. GOETZ-Yes, but how... MR. TURNER-It's 75 feet from the shoreline. MRS. GOETZ-But what are the dimensions of the present? MR. TURNER-It's right on the back. That's right on the water. Isn't that right on the water, Kevin? MR. TOOMEY-There is a corner of it that is, yes. MR. TURNER-Yes. Is this it? MR. TOOMEY-Yes. MR. TURNER-This is where he's going to put the dock. Is that correct, Kevin? MR. TOOMEY-Yes. MR. TURNER-This is the old, the rest of it, is that correct? MR. TOOMEY-That's the cement slab that's there right now. MR. TURNER-Yes, right. MRS. GOETZ-So we're talking about zero setback from the Lake, right? MR. TURNER-Just about. MRS. GOETZ-Because, in any variance motion we have to give dimensions. So, we'd have to know about zero. MR. TURNER-Does anybody have any questi ons for Mr. Toomey? Li ke Staff Input says, he tri ed before to put a building on that old site and there was a lot of concern over safety so close to the road. MRS. GOETZ-Where do you park? Do you live near by? MR. TOOMEY-Yes. MRS. GOETZ-So you don't have that problem right now. MR. TOOMEY-No. MRS. GOETZ-But the variance would go with the land, not the owner. Could that ever be a problem? Say somebody owned that, but doesn't live close by? MR. TURNER-You could condition it. You could give the approval. MRS. GOETZ-I'm just thinking ahead. 19 '-' MR. TURNER- Yes. MRS. GOETZ-Parking and that safety hazard. MR. TURNER-You could give him approval, when they dispose of the property or whatever it tenninates it. MR. CARR-But what would they have to do, tear down the deck? MR. TURNER-No. MRS. GOETZ-No. I'm just thinking that, safety was the big issue before. MR. TURNER-Well, safety was the big issue because they're so close to the road. MRS. GOETZ-Right. MR. TURNER-Right up to the road. MR. TOOMEY-For a family residence on that site that you're looking at. MRS. GOETZ-Right. I remember the application. MRS. EGGLESTON-This is just for your own personal use? MR. TOOMEY- Yes. MR. SICARD-You're going to take down that existing property, the four tenement houses you're talking about there? I don't understand. Did you say there's a house on the property? MR. TOOMEY-No. MRS. EGGLESTON-No. MR. TURNER-Remember he came to us once before, Charlie, and wanted to put a house on the old foundation that was there and it was so close to the road, the County disapproved it. We had reservations about it. We asked him for a survey and we tabled it. MR. SICARD-Well, the County's got something in here now. MR. TURNER-That's the time before. MR. CARR-They say No Impact. MR. TURNER-No Impact now. MR. KELLEY-Maybe you could tell us, since the Pavilion burned down, what uses have you had of the land, if any, or how have you used it and have you tried to do any other things, in tenns of making use of the land or tried to sell it. I mean, I know I was here when you tried to do the house thing and that didn't go, but have you had any other attempts or thoughts to do other things with it or how have you used it recently? MR. TOOMEY-Basically just for recreational purposes, for family. Other than that... MR. KELLEY-Just to go for a swim or put your canoe in or whatever. MR. TOOMEY-Yes. Has it been fonnally for sale? No, not really. MR. TURNER-Any other questions? MR. KELLEY-Yes. It says the lot size is 2.43 acres and I guess I'd ask the question of maybe Ted rather than Kevin, in this case. With 2.43 acres. does he have any reasonable use of the land? Can he build a building if he built it some place else? I know he tried to use the concrete foundation. MR. TURNER-Yes. and I think he tried to position, I don't know, you can check. I think he was talking. maybe, about putting a house up in here. Is that correct, up in this corner? MR. TOOMEY-Yes. MR. TURNER-And wasn't there a problem, maybe, with the well versus the septic system? You were going to pump the septic across the road. 20 -- -- MR. TOOMEY-That was an option, yes. MR. TURNER-That was a consideration? MR. TOOMEY-Yes. As opposed to a holding tank. MR. TURNER-Right. MR. TOOMEY-And 2.43, I believe that there is over three acres involved with the parcel on the other side of the road, I believe. That's deeded the same. MR. TURNER-That's one unit, one lot? MR. TOOMEY-Yes. MR. KELLEY-I kind of think of it as like the guy with the egg farm there, the chicken farm. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-You try and make the most use of the land and then, but you've got an expense to tear down this concrete structure that's there and the steel that's out near the water and all that sort of thing. So what, really, can he use the property for? It's pretty restrictive. MR. TURNER-He's pretty restricted because this goes right up here. MR. CARR-Unlike the man with the turkey farm or whatever, Mr. Toomey can't use the property for a residence because of safety issues. MR. TURNER-No. MR. CARR-Where as the other guy could, if he tore it down, use it for residential property. MR. KELLEY-Right. MR. CARR-That's a big difference. MR. TURNER-What is the depth of the lot up here, Kevin? What would be the depth up here, this way? There's no scale. MR. TOOMEY-No. I would guess that that is going to be around 200 feet. MR. TURNER-Two hundred feet? MR. TOOMEY-I would say 250 to 280. I would think. MR. TURNER-In that corner? Is it that deep? I didn't think it was that deep. Is this the fence line, the old fence that separated the pavilion and the picnic area? That's out of there now, right? MR. TOOMEY-There's a right-of-way that runs in here. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. TOOMEY-So, this area from point here to here, I'm only guessing. I don't know. I would assume to be somewhere around maybe 250. MR. TURNER-Before when you came for the other variance and we discussed maybe putting the house back up in here, I think an issue came up over the septic system and the well and that the reason for taking this across the road was to give you that 200 feet from the Lake where the septic system was. Isn't that correct? MR. TOOMEY-Yes. To be honest with you, I'm not 100 percent sure that the setbacks couldn't be met or very closely up in that upper area without taking it across the road. The concern about taking it across the road was I think, mainly, the distance and relation across the road as compared to way up on the hill, I believe. MR. TURNER-He could meet the setback there, 75 there. MR. KELLEY-Yes. MR. TURNER-And the setback here, but he'd have to put the house way up in this corner. 21 '"'--' -....I MR. KELLEY-It starts going up hill, right, at an angle, hillside? MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. CARR-But the issue i sn' t, if we give him a house, he's not goi ng to tear out that concrete and steel. I mean, that's going to stay there as an eyesore. MR. TURNER-We're just discussing the alternatives. MR. CARR-I mean, he could have both, really. One's preexisting. MR. TURNER-Yes. He could eventually put a house there. MR. CARR-Maybe, if he chose to do so and came up with the plans or whatever. MR. TURNER-Yes. Does anyone else have any questions? None? Okay, I'll now open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MARVIN DOBERT MR. DOBERT-Would it be possible to ask a question without being either opposed or in favor? MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. DOBERT-I live on Lake Sunnyside, Lakeview Drive. My name's Marvin Dobert. Elaine Coppotello's my neighbor and she lives very close to Howard. I just have some questions. A few things came into my mind. I didn't have an opportunity to read it and I didn't quite hear all the application as you read it, Susan. Did I hear you say that it would be just used for family recreational purposes? Is this your intention? MR. TOOMEY- Yes. MR. DOBERT-May I ask you a question? Is there any intention, at all, of making this a commercial venture, for example, boat storage for commercial purposes or boat rentals? MR. TOOMEY-At this point in time, no. MR. DOBERT-How about in the future? MR. TURNER-You can't have a marina. There's no marina's allowed, only by variance. MR. TOOMEY-I would have to come for a variance anyway. MR. TURNER-He'd have to come anyway. MR. DOBERT-I, personally, would be in favor of seeing an improvement of that property as it exists now. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. DOBERT-I don't have any young children, but I'd be very nervous if I had young children playing around that property, as it stands, in it's existing condition. So, in that case, I'd be very pleased, as a neighbor, to have it improved. I might add that the site, just from living on the Lake for two or three years as I have, I've noticed that the public access to Lake Sunnyside is very convenient across this property. I have no problem with that except that I have noticed, particularly in the wintertime, that there's some awful litter bugs out there on the Lake. When they get finished with their several functions that occur on the Lake, that Lake is a mess. Again, this is not in the nature of being for or against your activity, but the question I'd like to ask Howard is, do your future uses, would it tend to increase or decrease the public access to that? What's your feelings on that? Would you like to see the public access continued across your lot there? Does this concern you at all? I don't mean to put you on the spot. MR. TOOMEY-Yes, it concerns us and, again, we intend to fence the area off, but, again, we are required by Town and County Zoning to get a variance to even put a fence up. So, yes. MR. DOBERT-You've got a tough problem there. I understand it. I think we all understand it, on the Lake. I think I'd like to go on the record as saying I'm in favor of generally improving the facility as it stands there. Anything that would make it safer and I'd like, also, to go on record that Elaine Coppotello, her husband and myself are concerned about the nuisance of public litter on the Lake, particularly in the winter time. 22 '-'" '-- MR. TURNER-Okay. Does anyone else wish to be heard? Okay. The public hearing's closed. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED CORRESPONDENCE Warren County Planning Board returned "No County Impact" MR. KELLEY-How do you control the public access part of it? MR. TURNER-He can't control it, at this point, until he fences it off. MR. SICARD-Would he have to have a variance for a small fence, Ted? MR. TURNER-It's got to meet the setbacks, that's all. MR. SICARD-He still would have to have a variance for the fence? MR. TURNER-He might have, but I'm not sure. Waterfront Residential, he'd only be able to put up a four foot fence. MR. SICARD-Well, that's enough to stop them from launching and I think that's what his concern was. MR. TURNER-Well, I go by there just about every Saturday and in the winter time, people do access the Lake from there because it's the only place they can really get on in a lot of respects. MR. SICARD-Well, you have access down the Lake a ways, too. Going towards Bay Road there's an access point there that's not that used that much, but it goes down through those wooded trees. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. SICARD-It's an eight foot access. So, that isn't the only way onto the Lake, what he has. MR. TURNER-Right tmTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE (1). 94-1990 HOWARD M. roOMEY, Introduced by Susan Goetz who moved for its adoption, seconded by Jeffrey Kelley: There are special conditions applying to this property and not generally applying to others in the neighborhood. Strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of the property. The strict application of the dimensional requirements would result in a specified practical difficulty. The variance would not be detrimental to the purposes of the Ordinance or to property in the District and the request is the minimum relief necessary to relieve the practical difficulty. There is economic hardship on the part of the applicant to remove the steel and concrete structure existing and this structure will support the new propose deck. Duly adopted this 19th day of December, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Carr, Mr. Kelley, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Shea, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE AREA VARIANCE (1). 95-1990 TYPE II MR-5 KAREN J. WITTE OWNER: NORMM AND HELEN FERGUSON WEST SIDE OF BAY ROAD TO CREATE A LOT THAT IS USABLE, A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 75 FT. SETBACK FROM BROOK AND ROAD IS REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT A BUILDING FOR COMtERCIAl USE. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 60-7-4.1 LOT SIZE: 15,3OO± SQ. FT. SECTION 7.012 3 LEON STEVES, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from John Goralski, Planner (attached) MR. STEVES-Good evening. My name is Leon Steves. I'm here representing Karen Witte who wishes to purchase the property from Nonn Ferguson. As stated in the application, Mr. Ferguson owns 1.79 acres of property on Bay Road, west side of which there will be a very small portion allowed for usage, according to the present zoning. With the setback requi rements of 75 feet of the brook and 75 feet from the road, that's the only portion outlined in red that's usable on two acres of property. So what we're asking for is the minimum relief for both frontage from the highway, setbacks from the highway and the brook so we can create a lot, really, a building 900 square feet, if you will. MR. TURNER-Yes. You just make it don't you. Residence? 23 --../ "--- MR. STEVES-No. This will be a commercial venture. MR. TURNER-Commercial what? MR. STEVES-It will be rented, probably, to a dentist, psychiatrist, something like that. MR. TURNER-Okay. MRS. GOETZ-I had a question about the actual location. The way it says garage. It looked li ke a real house. MR. STEVES-No. Norm Ferguson lives in the house, the green house down there. MRS. GOETZ-Right. MR. STEVES-And that's his garage, just to the north of it. MRS. GOETZ-But it looked like, other than a garage. MR. STEVES-I don't know that. MRS. GOETZ-Well, it looked like it could be a second house. MR. SICARD-Sue, if I may, that was put in there first, before Norm built the house. MR. TURNER-Before he built the house, yes. MR. SICARD-He was a superintendent of buildings and grounds for the insurance company and they built the house slowly, but that little building was in there first. MRS. GOETZ-Okay, but my question was, it didn't look like a garage and it shows as a garage on here. MR. SICARD-Nobody lives there. MRS. EGGLESTON-But they're not buying the house. It's the property. MR. LEON-No. It's the southerly end, yes. MRS. EGGLESTON-Okay. MR. TURNER-Any questions of Mr. Steves? None? Okay. I'll open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED r«J COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED CORRESPONDENCE Warren County Planning Board, "Applicant agrees to consult with the soil and water conservation district in regards to erosion, grading, etc." MR. TURNER-Okay, Motion's in order. MRS. GOETZ-What are the dimensions? MR. TURNER-He's got a 75 foot from the brook and 75 foot from the road. MRS. GOETZ-But where are the dimensions on here, showing where it is from the road and the brook? MR. TURNER-Right there. MR. STEVES-Here's your 75 feet from the brook and here's the line 75 feet from the road. MRS. GOETZ-But how many feet are you requesting in the variance? MR. STEVES-It's 30 feet from the road. MRS. GOETZ-Because it doesn't show. 24 "-- - MR. STEVES-Thirty feet from the road and I think it's 45 feet from the brook. MRS. GOETZ-That looks 40 and it's 30 from Bay Road? MR. STEVES- Yes. MR. SHEA-Thirty from Bay Road and what else? MR. STEVES-And 40 from the brook. MRS. GOETZ-So it's going to be closer to the road than Mr. Ferguson's house? Is that right? MR. TURNER-No. It's pretty much the same. MR. STEVES-Not as close as the garage, though. MRS. GOETZ-Right, or whatever it is. MRS. EGGLESTON-This will be almost across from the entrance to ACC, will it not? MR. STEVES- Yes. MRS. EGGLESTON-So, what about the traffic? MR. STEVES-Well, it lies in between the two entrances. MR. SICARD-It's a pretty wide road down through there? MR. STEVES- Yes. MR. KELLEY- I was confused by reading, it says 1. 79 acres and then it says, but they wi sh to purchase 15,300 and I'm trying to think in addition to that and why. That's the whole thing that's the 1.79 and they want to buy 15,300 out of it. MR. STEVES-Yes, and you see the two maps. MR. KELLEY-Yes. MR. STEVES-And I think the location map will show you, too. The 1.79 is from here to here. MR. KELLEY-Right. MR. STEVES-The parcel cross hatched with the piece they're purchasing is a similar lot just to the south of it which is still vacant. MR. KELLEY-Who is that owned by? MR. STEVES-Artbo Realty. MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. KELLEY-Okay, because the Ordinance says they only have to have 5,000 square foot lots? MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. STEVES-Yes, it's MR-5. MR. TURNER-MR-5. MR. KELLEY-Okay. MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE fI). 95-1990 KAREN J. WITTE, Introduced by Jeffrey Kelley who moved for its adoption, seconded by Michael Shea: They're asking for relief from the 75 foot setback requirement from Bay Road and also relief from the 75 foot setback, in this case, from Old Maid's Brook. This seems to be a reasonable request since the lot size is more than three times the area that is required in the zone. However, the special circumstances are the proximity of the Brook to the road and in order to place a building on this property, a variance would have to be granted. We are granting relief of 45 feet from Bay Road, allowing them a 30 foot setback, and we are granting a setback of 40 feet, plus or minus, from Old Maid's Brook. Strict application of the dimensional requirements of the Ordinance would deny the applicant of reasonable use of the property. This does not appear to be detrimental to the purposes of the Ordinance and public facilities and services are not adversely effected. 25 -- -- Duly adopted this 19th day of December, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Kelley, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Shea, Mr. Turner NOES: Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston ABSTAINED: Mr. Carr AREA VARIANCE NO. 96-1990 TYPE II LI-lA C.R. BARD OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE Z66 BAY ROAD FOR AN ADDITION OF A 200 SQ. n. STORAGE SHED TO THE EXISTING BUILDING THAT lULL (l)T MEET THE SIDEYARD OR REARYARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 106-3-1 LOT SIZE: 7.99 ACRES SECTION 4.020 N BILL KELLER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner (attached) MR. KELLER-My name's Bill Keller. I represent C.R. Bard in this matter. MR. TURNER-I guess I'd ask you to elaborate on, "Would the strict application of Ordinance deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of the land or buildings". MR. KELLER-Okay. The building in question is already a building that does not meet the existing setback and we would like to add a 200 sq. ft. storage area. This building is currently used as a training center to train our more than 800 employees. In order to utilize this building as a training center and reap it's benefits, we need the space to store chairs, tables and other training supplies and this is why we were adding this addition on. MR. CARR-Why not in some other part of the building? MR. KELLER-If we put it on the back or side, which would be the north end of the building or the east end of the building, it would take up either a roadway space or parking and we desperately need all that we have. MRS. GOETZ-One question I had was I didn't see any dimensions here, like on how much square footage is built out on the property now and how much, you know, in relation to how much acreage you have and things like that. MR. TURNER-7.9 acres, almost eight acres. MRS. GOETZ-Here's Bay Road. MR. KELLER-This is the existing. This is the addition. This is all one lot of 7.9. MR. TURNER-Yes, almost eight. MRS. GOETZ-Because when we talk about adding on square footage, I'm just wondering how it relates to the square footage that you have overall now and are we getting close to maxing out, etc.? MR. KELLER-This is the existing building along this side of the roadway and on this side is parking, from here back. The railroad property runs into here. Here's a sprinkler riser for fire protection for this building. MRS. GOETZ-Wait a minute. This is the building we're talking about? MR. KELLER-This is the building in question. MRS. GOETZ-What was the number on it, because the buildings had numbers? MR. KELLER-Ten. MRS. GOETZ-But I'm tal king about all the buildings on the property. What is the square footage of all the buildings on the property? MR. KELLER-141,OOO square feet. MRS. GOETZ-Total? MR. KELLER-Of every building. 26 -- -- MR. CARR-You've got over 15 acres total. MR. KELLER- Yes. MRS. GOETZ-So you don't have a problem in coming close to permeability or anything? MR. TURNER-No. MR. CARR-It's 40,000 square feet per acre. MRS. GOETZ-I know, but I do think it's something that we should keep in mind in the overall plan. MRS. EGGLESTON-Did we look at the right one, just as you went over the railroad tracks? MR. KELLER-It's this one here. This is the building in question. If you went over the railroad tracks, and you took a right, you'd see a small building here. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes. This was all parking. MR. KELLER-If you went by that it would be this, with Board & Batter type siding on it. MRS. EGGLESTON-Okay. MR. TURNER-Railroad, we discussed that the last time, didn't we? MR. CARR-A railroad creates a lot of problems. MR. TURNER-Yes, it does. Okay, any further questions of Mr. Keller? MR. KELLEY-When we talked earlier I said my only concern would be if it did go to a bike trail and canal alliance and all those sort of things. MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. KELLEY-We were concerned, down on the Canal, with Genesee Refrigeration or something. They were trying to keep it back from an aesthetic thing, but I guess you've got to look at it based on what we're looking at today. MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. KELLEY-We don't know that that's going to take place or whatever. MR. CARR-Plus the building's already there. MR. KELLEY-Yes. I mean, they're only infringing on the Micelles on the other side. MR. TURNER-That's all. MRS. EGGLESTON-This is going to be a little closer to the railroad tracks, though, right, then the existing building? MR. KELLER- Yes. MRS. EGGLESTON-There is a difference there, by how much feet? MR. KELLER-It's about a foot. MR. TURNER-It's about a foot. We've got the dimension on the one end, but it includes the overall, 36 feet. MR. KELLER-It will be more clearly showing the scale on the other print. MR. TURNER-No further questions? Okay. I'll open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. ZOLl MRS. ZOLl-I'm the neighbor on the north side, Mrs. Zoli and I have no objection to them extending this storage building and in fact I prefer it beyond the railroad side. The railroad track goes right through their property and I don't see, in the future that as a bi ke trail or anything else makes any sense 27 -- -- at all, not unless they donate the back side of their property, because it wouldn't, there's buildings on both sides of the tracks. So I would prefer to see if that building is going to be extended there. I did have some other concerns that I spoke to Mr. Keller and Mr. Lindstrand today and mostly because of our north line which they assured me there was some piling next to our fence and some plowing of the snow into the fence and they assured me they would fix that. Also, there were some other things we discussed. One being this storage area. It's an open fenced area, it's on your map, that contains empty barrels from toxic wastes or whatever, toxic materials, but they are empty and 1'm concerned that being close to the property that particular fenced in area because it requires moving around it, storing things near it and our fence is constantly damaged. So Mr. Lindstrand said he would see if they could move that away from our line for me. The other thing they did suggest today, too, that maybe we could put some more trees in the back. Since the stonn in October of last year, a lot of the trees were down and a lot of the buffer zone is gone. So, hopefully, they're going to get a price on putting maybe some type of Christmas tree or Evergreen tree to screen the back and it really needs it because it's pretty messy back there. They've lost a lot of trees. We lost a lot of trees. At any rate, he's very amenable to doing this. So, I have no problem with them putting the addition on. MRS. GOETZ-Patty, why are those barrels empty? Did he say? MR. KELLER-There's no toxic or hazardous materials stored in the area. These are refurbished empty drums that we purchased from a vendor to move materials in and out of the plant. They're re-conditioned. You can put anything in them. It's like if you went out and bought a brand new 55 gallon drum. MRS. GOETZ-Is there any lettering on the drums? MR. KELLER-There will be a DOT classification stamp on it, as required by DOT, Department of Transportati on. MRS. GOETZ-Yes. MRS. EGGLESTON-What is the material? MR. KELLER-It's empty. MRS. EGGLESTON-No, but you said it's used to carry material in and out. What material? MR. KELLER-Various wastes that the plant generates. MR. CARR-But those barrels are always empty, that's what you're saying? MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. KELLER-Right. This is used, and we're looking at, and we talked to Mrs. Zoli today about just removing that fenced in slab and the fence next to our storage facility. MRS. GOETZ-Good, because it probably makes it look worse now than what it is. MR. KELLER-It's been there for years. MRS. GOETZ-I know it's been there. MR. KELLER-Look worse, it borders a wooded, swampy lot. MRS. GOETZ-No. I'm talking about scary. MR. KELLER-Scary? MRS. GOETZ-Seriously, because I've looked at that property over the years and been with somebody taking pictures of it. Let's face it, it was a hazardous disposal site at one point. MR. KELLER-It was an alleged hazardous disposal site. MRS. GOETZ-Well then it was taken off the list, but I think what you're proposing sounds good, because my point is, when you look at a fenced in area with those barrels, I can see why you didn't like it. MRS. ZOLI-Well, I was just frightened because we've had trouble with children back there and they assured me that they were empty and I would just as soon not have it near the fence anyway, only because I think there's more moving around and activity of things stored there. So, we ironed that out. Thank you. MR. TURNER-Okay, thank you. Does anyone else wish to make comments? Okay. Public hearing's closed. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 28 '--' -- CORRESPONDENCE Warren County Planning Board returned "No County Impact" MR. TURNER-Okay, motion's in order. MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE fI). 96-1990 C.R. BARD, Introduced by Bruce Carr who moved for its adoption, seconded by Jeffrey Kelley: I would allow the applicant a variance of 46 feet from the setback requirement. There are special circumstances applying to this property in that the D & H Railroad property dissects the lot. Strict application of the Ordinance would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of the building in that the applicant has demonstrated a pressing need for the additional space. Because of the location of the existing building, strict application of the requirements would result in a practical difficulty for the applicant, that this variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty and this variance would not be materially detrimental to the Ordinance. Duly adopted this 19th day of December, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shea, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Eggleston, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Carr, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE AREA VARIANCE NO. 88-1990 THIJTHY BARBER OWNER: DICK AID SUE ROURKE GLEN LAKE TIMOTHY BARBER, PRESENT MR. TURNER-The next order of business is the application of Timothy Barber for Dick and Sue Rourke of Glen Lake which we tabled for further infonnation. The last time around we had been provided with that new infonnation. MRS. GOETZ-Was there an actual brand new application, because the only one I see is 88-1990? MR. TURNER-Do we have a new elevation and plan? MR. BARBER-Yes. MRS. COLLARD-There's a whole new application. MRS. GOETZ-Is it 88? MR. CARR-Same number, though? MRS. COLLARD-I imagine it's the same number, but it's a whole new application. MRS. GOETZ-Okay, because this is stamped original. STAFF INPUT Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner (attached) MR. TURNER-Do you have a drawing? MR. BARBER- Yes. MR. TURNER-Okay, Tim. MR. BARBER-What we're asking for, this is the base level here and from the original size of the camp that's there, we want to come out four feet from the existing footing and go back nine feet. MR. TURNER-This is what you had proposed before, four feet on the one side, it would be the south side? MR. BARBER-Yes, it would. No, I believe it would be the north. MR. TURNER-North side? MR. BARBER-The north side. We're actually going a little bit both ways because we're trying to center the house on the lot to best meet the requi rements and in the front we're actua 11 y steep, because of the prow, with the prow front we're following the shoreline. We're actually stepping back a couple of feet from the existing footing. MR. TURNER-Okay. 29 -....;' -- MR. BARBER-And then for a top partial story we have a front master bedroom and a bathroom and another bedroom. We're looking for the width because for the architectural design of the Lake, we don't want to put a so called thin modular unit in there. We want to go for the 28 feet. MR. TURNER-Have you got an elevation drawing on it showing both levels? MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. TURNER-Side view? MR. BARBER-Yes. You'll note on this too that, I have pictures on that poster board that I'll show you afterward, the grade of this house is a lot lower than the adjacent neighbors and in the front you can see we're keeping the house to the land. We're not changing the grade of the land at all. We're keeping the front down. We're going right back with it. MR. TURNER-Okay, you're sticking with the garage where you had it before, right? MR. BARBER-No, there's no garage. I didn't draw up a new sheet. MR. TURNER-No garage? Okay. I thought you did. MR. CARR-Tim, why do they need so much space? MR. BARBER-Well, if you think about it 2800 square feet is, this is a retirement home. This is a one shot deal. This is it. MR. CARR-Yes, but this is a lake that's already over crowded. I mean, if this was in the middle of Tyneswood or something, yes, but. MR. BARBER-Let me give you a sheet, here, and you can pass it around, of the neighboring house sizes. MR. CARR-Okay. MR. BARBER-And that's the house sizes lot for lot and side for side there and if I went around the Lake, I would get houses relative and a lot larger than what we're proposing. MRS. GOETZ-But the purpose of the new Ordinance was to not make the same mistakes, over and over and over again. I really feel this is just too much right on the Lake so close. MR. BARBER-Well, if you consider the lot size and we're back, let me show you that graph board there. MR. CARR-Tim, where are these people, compared to this house? MR. BARBER-On either side. The only ones I don't have are these fol ks here and Tinney. They did not have records of them up at the Assessor's Offices. MR. CARR-Okay, so where are these people, then? MR. BARBER-On either sides. MR. CARR-Like down and down here? MR. BARBER-Yes, right along the Lake. MR. TURNER-Is Collotti's there? MR. BARBER-I didn't go as far as that, no. I went from Sinece to Collotti. I can show you on this drawing, the elevation of the house. You can see the elevation here. I wanted to show you how it is. It is down in a hole. You can see the top of the house compared to the neighbors. See, we're in a hole. We are actually in a kind of a dug in hole there. If you're looking down the neighbor's house, the front line of their home actually meets the Lake. So we're actually almost at the back of their house where we're starting. You can see here where we're down in the hole. This is the top of the house then the land on each side of us here. MR. TURNER-Yes, you are down in a hole. MR. BARBER-Right. The neighbors are way out. MR. CARR-Well, it looks like they're in the hole, though. MR. BARBER-Sure. 30 ~ -- MR. CARR-Because I mean this is their first floor right here, right? MR. BARBER-This is theirs. This is ours. MR. CARR-No, right, but right here, this is the hill? MR. BARBER-Right. MR. CARR-Then this is their porch roof. MR. BARBER-Right. MR. CARR-So, they've gone down again. MR. BARBER-Right. MR. CARR-So they've got a second story. MR. BARBER-That's correct. Both sides, and you can see the elevation of the land. We want to keep that elevation. If you'll note, this is the fireplace, right here, in front of Dick's home and that's right at the Lake and it cuts in there. MRS. GOETZ-Mr. Barber, the neighbor immediately to the north, what is that name? MR. BARBER-That is Haight. MRS. GOETZ-Are they on here? MR. BARBER-No. They had no assessment records up there for them either. MR. TURNER-Lyford lives on the point, down Jay Road? MR. BARBER-He lives right in the corner there. MR. TURNER-Yes. You've got Gorman Rich's house. MR. BARBER-He's on the other point. MR. TURNER-He's on the other point, but then you've got, there's another one right there. It's a big house. MR. BARBER-Yes, that's Higgley. It's on the other point. They bought Germaine's home. MR. TURNER-No, that's not the guy I'm thinking of. MRS. GOETZ-We gave Higgley a variance. MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. BARBER-Valenti bought the new home, the windmill house there, past Gorman Rich's. MR. TURNER-Yes, the one that's right out on the point. MR. BARBER-Right. MR. TURNER-That was a guy that used to be down at the Eagle Clothing Store or something, McCloud. MRS. EGGLESTON-Not McCloud, Callahan. MR. SICARD-Callahan. MR. TURNER-Callahan. MR. BARBER-Callahan, yes. I didn't go to that point. MR. SICARD-Rich is next to him. MRS. EGGLESTON-And which house is on the other side? MR. BARBER-Yes. I didn't go up the shore. 31 -- -- MRS. EGGLESTON-To the immediate other side, which one of these. Other than Mrs. Haight, which one of those people is on the other side of Rourke? MR. TURNER-Over here? MRS. EGGLESTON-No, on this list. MR. BARBER-Over here? MRS. EGGLESTON-On the list. MRS. GOETZ-To the south side. MR. BARBER-Okay, that would be Higgley. MRS. GOETZ-Higgley isn't right next door to them. DICK ROURKE MR. ROURKE-No, that's Tinney. MRS. GOETZ-Tinney is next and then it's Higgley. MR. BARBER-Tinney is next door. They had no records. I looked this morning, even, for probably 45 minutes. MR. ROURKE-But both of those are two story homes. MRS. GOETZ-Right, but the thing of it is, they were there already. We're talking about improving the situation on the Lake. MR. BARBER-Right. MRS. GOETZ-That's the whole crux of the matter. MR. BARBER-Higgley had an expansion. MRS. GOETZ-But it was prior to, I don't know the exact date. I'd have to look it up. MR. BARBER-I believe not, and Lyford's also. MRS. GOETZ-But it might have happened before the new Ordinance was adopted, and now we have, there was a reason for making some of the changes on the Lake, which have been expressed to you. MR. BARBER-Right, but what I'm concerned with is, you take a 24 foot building, and that's basically a modular and this is a nice area and, the architectural appeal of the home we want to confonn with others. MRS. GOETZ-Right, but the thing is, you have to remember that you are so close to the Lake. MR. BARBER- Yes. MRS. GOETZ-We're not talking about a piece of property that's up somewhere with no problems with it. MR. BARBER-Right. MRS. GOETZ-And they bought it knowing what the situation was. MR. BARBER-Right, but even with the size of the lot, the one side, we're not meeting our total of 50, but we're coming as close as possible of meeting our total of 20 on both sides. MRS. GOETZ-I'm concerned about the square footage. SUSAN ROURKE MRS. ROURKE-Could I answer that? That seems to be one of the big hangups. Sue Rourke. We have a home, now. I've been in it for 26 years. I have a buyer for it. We bought this to be our retirement home. Now I'm taking everything that I've had and I'm moving it up. Hopefully, I'll throw out a few things. I want it airy. When we built the house we're in now it was cramped with the children, to accormtlodate them. Life-styles have changed now. You're at a Lake. You want air. You want room. You want to be able to have friends over for a barbecue. That's why you live there, and I want closets. I've lived for 26 years with no closets. I want closets. I know it sounds crazy, but I'm not one to move around every five years. This is it. 32 '-- """-"'" MRS. GOETZ-Okay. All the reasons that you've stated are good reasons to want whatever it is you want, but you have certain conditions on the land where you want to go and that makes it a little bit different and we have to look at certain things because of it. I'm not against closets, but really, I mean, this is why I feel the way I do. MRS. ROURKE-We don't have any neighbor objection and I don't think four feet is unreasonable and we are very low, if you look at those pictures. MRS. GOETZ-I've been there. MRS. ROURKE-Okay. MRS. GOETZ-The square footage is what concerns me. MR. BARBER-If you take the main floor, per se, the total square footage that we would be adding to the camp now is 528 square feet. MRS. GOETZ-In the Staff Input it says it's an increase of 1648 square feet. MR. BARBER-That's total overall. MR. TURNER-That's total overall. MR. ROURKE-That's the second story. MR. TURNER-That's the second story. MR. BARBER-What I'm saying is the camp that is there, we only want to come over that four feet, go back to the six feet, which would be nine more in the back, and across, which would be a total of 528 feet additional. MRS. GOETZ-Well, that doesn't change the way I think about it. What do other people think? I've stated what my opinion is. MR. CARR-Tim, I mean, this is a four bedroom home for a retirement home. MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. CARR-I mean, that's a family home, isn't it? I mean, four bedrooms? MRS. ROURKE-Downstairs is set up so that if either of us becomes incapacitated, we can close off upstairs and we have total living conditions downstairs and the doorways will be made as such to accommodate a wheelchair for handicapped access and we've tried to think of all the things we would need. We feel good now, but that's today and I have four bedrooms now. MR. CARR-Yes, but that's not the same situation. MRS. ROURKE-Yes, but the rooms are not, I want to use rooms. I want to be able to set up a sewing project and leave it, okay. Always keep one room if my granddaughter comes, I have a room. MRS. EGGLESTON-How many total bedrooms will you have? MRS. ROURKE-What are in there now? MRS. EGGLESTON-How many on the first floor? MRS. ROURKE-One. MRS. EGGLESTON-One on the first floor? MR. ROURKE-And there's a sewing room. MRS. ROURKE-Two. MR. TURNER-A sewing room, but you've got a master suite upstairs that's 16 foot 2 inches by almost, a little over 29 feet long. MRS. EGGLESTON-And how many on the second floor? MRS. ROURKE-Two. 33 - ---' MRS. EGGLESTON-Two bedrooms on the second floor? MRS. ROURKE-Yes, that's only three. MR. TURNER-Plus a bedroom of 13.8 by 11.3. MR. CARR-Three full baths. MR. TURNER-Yes, three baths, and another bedroom of 15 foot by 10.7~. MR. ROURKE-That downstairs is basically for people, that's why you could enter it from the Lake, so people won't track through the house. MR. CARR-But then there's two baths upstairs, right? MR. ROURKE-Right. One in the master bedroom. bedrooms and the master bath is a private bath. You don't want, the other two bedrooms. It's not a common bath for a home. Those are guest MRS. ROURKE-I've shared one of those for 26 years, too. MR. CARR-And I'm starting to. MR. TURNER-You've got a master suite there 29 feet long. MR. BARBER-No, excuse me. This is 28. MR. TURNER-Well, 28 by 16.2. MR. BARBER-The inner wall would be 27. MR. TURNER-Yes. Okay, that's still one heck of a big room. The other plan was 3100 square feet. MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. TURNER-And the last plan, was that the last plan, 3100 square feet? No, the first one was 3100. The last plan was 27 or 28 and the other plan had a garage on it and this one doesn't. MR. BARBER-Yes, we deleted the garage and I added up all the square footage so there would be no confusion. MR. TURNER-I just want to relate one thing. I guess when I talked to you that day that you came down and saw me, my idea was when you were going to delete the garage, you were going to stay with the house size you have and that would have taken 700 square feet right off the house, if I remember right. MR. KELLEY-Well, I think it was 2492 and the garage was 672, but it came out 1820. These are notes from before. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-So, with 1820, now we're up to 2872. MR. BARBER-No, on the other print I didn't not take the garage into consideration. That's what the confusion was, if you remember. MR. TURNER-You had 1820. I thought we took the garage. MR. BARBER-This is the total structure and the garage was to be up here. I'd drawn that in and I didn't even put it down. We're trying to meet our side line setbacks the best we can. MR. KELLEY-I don't think anybody has a problem with the side lines. I really think the problem is the size. MR. TURNER-The size of the structure. MR. KELLEY-I mean, I don't like to be the one to sit here and tell Dick, I've known him 20 years. You don't like to do that to people. It hurts me to have to say I feel that way, but I have to look at it from the standpoint of what the Ordinance is trying to do. MR. BARBER-Well, what would yourself consider a proper size for a person? MR. KELLEY-I think the problem is, when you look at a .31 acre piece of property and there's a building on there that, technically, you could rebuild on the same footprint and not even be here, and then to come in and say you want to more than double it, especially when they've tal ked about critical environmental areas. 34 -- ~ MR. BARBER-The square footage is mounting because we're adding a second floor. MRS. GOETZ-Right, we understand that. MR. KELLEY-Yes, but square footage is square footage. I don't care where you put it and I don't think it's going to fly. My point is, you've got to look at, people sitting here are probably saying, what is reasonable and for one, the Ordinance says if it's more than a 50 percent increase, you've got to come to get a variance. MR. BARBER-Right. MR. CARR-There's a presumption of unreasonableness within the Ordinance. I mean, the rules of the Ordinance. MR. KELLEY-Right. If it's reasonable to go over that and now they're saying it may not be reasonable. MR. CARR-Right. I mean, you're asking for almost, I mean, 110 percent increase. MR. BARBER-That's because we're adding that second story. It's still basically within the footprint. MR. CARR-I think you're also, I mean, the one major problem that I have is you're dealing with what has been declared a very critical area. MR. BARBER-Yes, what about all the adjacent homes. MR. CARR-Those all happened before the Ordinance occurred and the Ordinance was re-done because of that. MR. BARBER-Now this new Ordinance deprives the Rourkes of using this property and building as their neighbors did? MR. CARR-Unfortunately, the Ordinance was in place in May of 1990. MRS. EGGLESTON-When they bought that. MR. CARR-It was in place, and the feeling of the Board I think was quite evident at that time. I mean, it seems to me that when you deal in a very congested area, one of the first things you always look at is zoning to see what you can and can't do. Especially if you're buying it with the idea that you're going to change it somehow. MR. BARBER-I don't feel that that's, for the lot size, that's not a congested area for that home. Sure the elevations look big, but look at the setbacks and look at the lot size in general. MR. ROURKE-Your septics are going to be way up in back. MR. TURNER-They've got to be anyway. MR. BARBER-Yes, we're putting the existing septics down in here somewhere if I'm correct, right Dick? MR. ROURKE-Right. MR. TURNER-Yes, but that was a seasonal camp, then. Now, it's going to be year round. So that means that's got to go 200 feet from the Lake. MR. ROURKE-You look at some of the lots up there on the same road going down by Crowes and down that area. They're not even 100 feet deep. MRS. GOETZ-But that's part of the problem and that's why we're trying to improve this situation and not repeat the same things that were done before that maybe should never have been done. MR. CARR-I mean, what you're saying is that other lots are creating a problem, so let me create one. MR. ROURKE-But what I'm saying is, I'm putting the septic there. MRS. GOETZ-But it's not just your septic. It's the impact of all that house right so close to the Lake. MR. BARBER-But this additional 528 square feet on the base floor is that much of an impact? I don't understand why it's such an impact on that lot? MRS. GOETZ-Because it's so close to the Lake. 35 -- - MR. SICARD-Jeff, how much over do you feel that that house, size wise, is? I mean, what makes you think that it's overly big? How many square feet, 500 square feet, 200 square feet or what? MR. KELLEY-Well, the Ordinance says that they have to get a variance if it's over 50 percent. So, I would say, if you added. what. If they've got 1224 now. 50 percent of that would be. what, 612. So, that would be an 1836 square foot building. I'd say that's probably what belongs there. MR. SICARD-1800 square feet? MR. SHEA-That wouldn't require a variance. MR. CARR-Ri ght. MR. KELLEY-I wouldn't require one. MR. CARR-Right. not from that size. MR. KELLEY-It would still require one for the setback and that sort of thing. MR. BARBER-The downstairs is 1752. MR. SICARD-Well, wasn't the original plan. wasn't the problem on the side setback? MR. BARBER- Yes. MR. SICARD-I didn't think it was the size of the building that was the problem. I thought it was the side setback was the problem. MR. CARR-Well. we didn't know it was a problem until.. MR. SICARD-Didn't have the dimensions. MR. CARR-Right. MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. SICARD-But they reduced the side setback then. MR. KELLEY-Well, they centered it up. MR. BARBER-We centered it up and we reduced the si ze of the home two feet the length of the house and we took out our juts. We had juts coming out to make it more appealing. MR. SHEA-As a thought. what if they were to build on the same footprint only go two complete stories, then they would be exceeding the 50 percent rule which would require a variance, but they wouldn't need any other variances. correct? MR. CARR-Right. because it's preexisting. MR. KELLEY-They rebuild on the same footprint, that's correct. MRS. COLLARD-Right, if they build in the same footprint. MR. SHEA-And that would give them 2500 square feet rather than 28, but would only necessitate one variance and the same size, being on the same footprint, really wouldn't infringe on the neighbors. All that it would be is a second story up, which would give them a compromising point from the square footage point of view. would require us only to come up with one variance, would certainly take into account the sensitive nature of the environment and being on the Lake, but give them, to a larger degree. more of the living space that they feel that they need. Would something like that be more reasonable? MR. CARR-That would reduce the house by over, almost 420 feet. MRS. GOETZ-Jeff. did you say reasonable size, overall is 1800. MR. KELLEY-No, that's what the Ordinance says. MRS. GOETZ-If you went without the 50 percent expansion. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes. MR. KELLEY-If you took what was there and add 50 percent. 36 '-' - MR. TURNER-50 percent. MR. KELLEY-Well, that would be half, right? MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. KELLEY-So, that would be 1836. MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. KELLEY-So, they coul d get 1836 and not have to get a si ze vari ance, all ri ght. Mi ke' s sayi ng if it's 1224, and you double it, it would be, what, 2448. MR. TURNER-Yes. MRS. GOETZ-That's still a lot. MR. ROURKE-The houses on both sides are double, two stories. MR. BARBER-What we're looking at, here, too, we're trying to make it appealing. The first door we're keepi ng down so we're not i nfri ngi ng on anybody' s vi ew of the La ke and we're bumpi ng the second story up, further back. We didn't want that box style house look. MR. TURNER-You know what's really going to diminish is the size of the house on that little strip of property that faces the Lake and that's just what it is, even with the setbacks, that size of the house is going to diminish the size of the lot. Maybe not in measurements, but a general look at it is going to make that lot look small. MRS. GOETZ-l still think the variance that they would still need to seek if they did what Mike suggested is like the most crucial variance part of it. I'm not sure I still wouldn't have a problem with that, because 2500 is a lot. MR. BARBER-What's the average size of your home? MRS. GOETZ-I don't even know how big my house is, but I don't live right next to the Lake either. MR. ROURKE-What's the size of yours, Jeff? MR. KELLEY-21. MR. ROURKE-Yours is 21? MR. CARR-But he's not in a critical environmental area. MRS. GOETZ-Right. It doesn't matter what the size of my house is, because I don't live on Glen Lake, so many feet from it. MR. BARBER-Well, what you're addressing is that, you're saying it's a huge house. It's not a huge house. MR. TURNER-It's huge in the way it sits on the lot and where it sits on the lot. It's going to diminish the size of the lot. MRS. EGGLESTON-For my way of thinking, you could build a beautiful home on there and stay within the somewhat reasonable size. MRS. ROURKE-I have one in college. Mine have not all flown the nest. MR. SHEA-Those considerations really have no bearing whatsoever, unfortunately, with all due respect, they have no bearing whatsoever on what we're trying to accomplish and what our mandate is. I think, Sue, the most difficult thing to ascertain, here, is what we think is reasonable for the size of the house and what the applicant thinks is reasonable, keeping in mind the sensitive nature and that's why I don't think that we're going to come to the right and certainly not maybe a favorable decision. That's why I think that you have to be in a compromising point of view and that's why I think that if you base it on reducing the number of variances that we have to get and going on the same footprint as before, then you're not infringing on the neighbors with regards to side line setbacks. You're not infringing on the closeness of the Lake. The only thing that you're discussing is what is reasonable for them to live in, what size house. I mean, we really can't decide that, nor can we decide what, if it's going to have that much more of a detrimental effect to the Lake and the surroundings if we grant them 2800 square feet or if we grant them 2400 square feet. I mean, we're not going to really know how much that 400 square feet or whatever the number is will really make a difference. So, my opinion is that if they were going the same footprint, ask for no other variances other than going beyond the 50 percent rule, that you should be able to corne up with something that both sides can live wi tho ~7 --- -- MR. TURNER-I agree with you, but they've got to offer us an alternative and they haven't. They said, this is what we want. They haven't said, this is the minimum we could take and this is the maximum that we would want. They haven't offered us anything. They just said, this is a 2800 square foot house. MRS. GOETZ-Could we hear what anyone in the audience has to say about it? MR. TURNER-We haven't yet. MRS. GOETZ-I'd like to hear that to give me more information. MR. TURNER-That's the only problem I have with it. I don't have a problem with them having a house there, but when you've got a master bedroom that's 16 feet wide and almost, over 29 feet long, that's one heck of a big room just for a bedroom. MR. SICARD-You took the garage out didn't you? MR. BARBER-Yes, we took the garage out and also the bul k of the square footage is occurring back here, but we're coming back to nine feet, 9 by 28, two storys and that's in the rear of the lot, going towards the rear of the lot and it is wider back there. I believe we do make our 20 foot setbacks there, on the rear, if I'm not mistaken. We're trying to do the best we can. MR. KELLEY-How come you took the garage off, let me ask you that? MR. BARBER-Well, we felt we wanted the house and they don't need it and it just makes it look so much bi gger. MRS. GOETZ-They don't need a garage? MR. BARBER-No. MRS. GOETZ-Would they be building one later, somewhere else on the property? MR. BARBER-If they did at some point, it would probably be up towards the driveway. MRS. GOETZ-And you wouldn't need any variances? MR. BARBER-No, you'd need no variances. MRS. GOETZ-Because people always come in and say they need a garage. MR. BARBER-No. This is a one shot deal. This is what we're going for. Where they put a garage, they will need no variances. Eventually, if they put a garage, it will be where they'll need no variances. MR. TURNER-Okay, any further questions? I'll now open the public hearing and see what the neighbors have to say. (END OF FIRST DISK) 38 - ~ PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MONICA HAIGHT MRS. HAIGHT-I'm Monica Haight and like I've said before, I have no objections to the Rourke's building a house. In fact, I wish they could get on with it so we'd know where we're going. I have a question though. Is there going to be a cellar? MR. BARBER-Yes. MRS. HAIGHT-Is it going to be dug? MR. BARBER-Yes. MRS. HAIGHT-I mean, my concern is that we're pretty low down there and I'm at the same level as they are. Now, if you dig a cellar, I don't know. We get water as soon as we go down. My concern is that it's going to be a cement block or something that's going to come up and are they going to bring fill in and then grade it towards me? MR. TURNER-To raise the elevation you mean? MR. BARBER-No, the grade is going to stay the same. MR. ROURKE-The grade is going to stay the same. MRS. HAIGHT-Then how are you going to put a cellar in there? MR. BARBER-What we're going to do, in the front it's just going to be a crawl space underneath the cathedral part and we're going to try to reach a six foot head room if we can, in the back, for our plumbing needs and for easy maintenance of the home. MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. BARBER-And we're staying right with the lay of the land, the foundations. MR. TURNER-Your heating system is going to be what? MR. BARBER-Is going to be hot water base board. MR. TURNER-Okay, so you're going to have a boiler downstairs? MR. BARBER-Yes, we're going to have a boiler downstairs. MR. TURNER-Did you have any further questions? I just wanted to get his answer to your question. MRS. HAIGHT-No. MR. TURNER-Do you support the application or are you opposed to the application? You didn't really say. MRS. HAIGHT-Well, as they stated, I have no, if that's the way it goes. MR. TURNER-You don't have any objection as to the size of the house as proposed, now? MRS. HAIGHT-No, I guess not. Not the way it sounds. MRS. EGGLESTON-How much square footage do you have in your home? MRS. HAIGHT-You know, I really don't know. It's a camp. It's one of those affairs that started out one room and then was patched on. MR. TURNER-Added on. MRS. HAIGHT-It was one room downstairs and then over that one more room and there have been partitions put up and then on the one side an addition that was used as a kitchen and the back an addition for a bathroom. MR. TURNER-Tim, I've got a question for you. Grimes just built a house there not too long ago. How big is that one? MR. BARBER-Excuse me? 39 '--' --.-' MR. TURNER-Ron Grims just built a house there not too long ago, two or three years ago? MR. BARBER-Okay. If I'm not mistaken, that's at the far end of the Lake, north. MR. TURNER-It's down farther, yes. MR. BARBER-The two story log cabin. MR. TURNER-Okay. MR. BARBER-I believe that structure is 30 by 40. It is huge. MR. TURNER-That's a big one. MR. BARBER-Yes, it's two story. MR. TURNER-On this list, here, you've got Doty 3150. MR. BARBER-That's right off the Assessment records. MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. BARBER-That's right after Monica's home, to the north. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-The problem with that is it doesn't tell lot sizes in relation to it. MR. TURNER-No. MRS. EGGLESTON-No. MR. KELLEY-I mean, they could all be 10 acre lots and might be grandiose. MR. TURNER-Is Doty's house back? MR. BARBER-They have two lots there. One is the garage structure which is mentioned there and one is the house as I read it on the Assessment forms. MR. TURNER-They have an apartment here. MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. TURNER-Higg1ey's is 1512 square feet. MR. BARBER-Correct, and they're real close to the Lake. MRS. GOETZ-They have a lot of property though. MR. BARBER-No, they have a lot of Lake frontage. They have a point. MRS. GOETZ-A point, which is part of the property. MR. BARBER-Which is 10 feet for probably 50. It goes, and then straight down this way. MRS. GOETZ-That's way out on the point. MR. ROURKE-Yes, you've got that point. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. ROURKE-These are all the same. MR. BARBER-Right. They're all about the same. The only one that is not the same is Higg1ey, because they have that huge point there. They have 575 feet of Lake front. MR. TURNER-Lyford's house is where? MR. BARBER-Is over here. MR. TURNER-It's down over here, right. 40 -- -- MR. BARBER-Yes, right here across the Bay. MR. TURNER-That's a big house. MR. BARBER-Yes. MR. TURNER-3,031. MR. BARBER-And Sineces is half, half the size of the lot, if that. MR. TURNER-Okay. Any further questions of the applicant? Timmy, have you done any other scenario as to the layout of the house? MR. BARBER-Yes, I've drawn up many ways with 24 foot raw home, is what I call it. Twenty four feet is not that wide to, just a two story structure 24 feet high would in my mind stick out as a blemish rather than stepping it back as we are and making it architecturally blend in with the lot and the surroundings. I mean, we're keeping the second story so that we're not infringing on anybody's overview of the Lake or anything like that. That's right down the in the hole, and we're actually, from the mean highwater we're actually moving back and essentially this whole, from possibly right ahead of this 28 foot dimensional line, that's all single story. MR. TURNER-Yes, this part here. MR. BARBER-Cathedral, yes. MR. TURNER-And from here back it goes up. MR. BARBER-Yes, to the second story, but we're keeping that. MR. TURNER-That depth of that room is 16, 17 feet, probably about, 17. MR. BARBER-That's the master bedroom. The single story cathedral up front is, with the prow, 28 by 20. MR. TURNER-Yes, 20 feet. MR. BARBER-The prow takes up four feet of that, we're pointing it out. MR. TURNER-So, that's 68 feet before you start to go up? MR. BARBER- Yes. MR. TURNER-Okay. MR. BARBER-That's one of the reasons we're bringing it back to confonn with the grade of the land. There's some nice trees there that I think go good in the elevations. MR. TURNER-Okay. Let's see what we're going to do. Okay. Public hearing's closed. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED CORRESPONDENCE Warren County Planning Board returned "No County Impact" Letter from Jean LaRoche, south side of Rourkes: "Sue and Dick Rourke have been my next door neighbors at Glen Lake for many many years. They have been good neighbors and have always kept up their property with improvements over the years. I have absolutely no objections whatsoever to any variances they may need or want to build a new house. I am certain that any variances will be handled in good taste and will only enhance their new dwelling. Any improvements the Rourkes make on their property can only make my property of my value. Please grant them the variance." Letter from Donald Higgley: "I approve construction of building at Jay Road, Glen Lake. This can only enhance and improve their property and the adjoining properties which include mine. Your yes vote is solicited." MR. TURNER-Okay. Any further discussion? MR. KELLEY-I guess other than if we can come up with what we think is a reasonable increase. If there's a dilemma, I think that's it. MR. TURNER-At this point in time, they're not offering a compromise. So, I think we've got to vote on what they've got. 41 '~ -../ MR. CARR-Yes. MOTION TO DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. 88-1990 TIMOTHY BARBER. Introduced by Susan Goetz who moved for its adoption, seconded by Bruce Carr: I feel that there are no special conditions applying to this property or building and not applying generally to others in the neighborhood. Strict application of the Ordinance would not deprive the applicant of reasonable use of the property. Strict application of the dimensional requirements would not result in a specified practical difficulty and the variance would be materially detrimental to the Ordinance and property in the District. The request is not the minimal relief to alleviate the practical difficulty. Duly adopted this 19th day of December, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Carr. Mr. Kelley, Mrs. Goetz. Mrs. Eggleston. Mr. Turner NOES: Mr. Sicard, Mr. Shea On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Theodore Turner. Chairman 42 · ~ r "'--' FILE COpy Þt.tM ':s h: 'V/(rJ:, I kc. ·I~, 9'0 N011CE OF PUBUC HEARINGS Pursuant to section lZ.060 of an ordinance of the Town of Queensbury entitled ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY and SIGN ORDINANCE, notice is hereby given that the Town Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Queensbury will conduct public hearings on Wecl1IMday, December 19, 1990 at 7:30 p.m. at the Queensbury Town Office Building (Meeting Place: Queensbury Center Building), Bay and Haviland Roads to consider the following Variance applications: Notice of Appeal No. 4-90 Interpretation of Zoning Ordinance with reference to quick launch facilities. This pertains directly to the Dunham's Bay Boat Company, Inc. Boat Storage Facility. Gilbert O. Boehm, John Salvador, Earl Shortsleeves, Mildred Woodin, and John Schriner. 1. Is a Boat Storage Facility the same or part of a Marina? . Z. Is a Quick Launch Facility the same or part of a Boat Storage Facility? 3. Is a Quick Launch Facility or Marina for boat sales allowable in a 4Z acre zone in Queensbury? Request for Interpretation By: Tax Map No. 10-1-19.Z Special Use Permit No. 35 granted: 11/15/7Z Notice of Appeal No. 5-90: The Planning noard is appealing the decision of theZODing Administrator in the matter of the Hogan Site Plan No. 76-90. The Planning Board is in agreement that Section 9.011B of the Zoning Ordinance applies to this property. Town of Queenabury Signed: Wedll1f'i:"" December lZ, 1990 SUND Goetz, Secretary - Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York Dated: 4 ¡. ¡J,'.{.;..J.""-'-'" -<t --.-."- ".;<:7:!7-';--<.. .) .. .. ,- ~ -- . - TOWN OF QUEENSBURY 531 Bay Road, Queensbury, NY 12804-9725 (518) 792-5832 TO: All Interested Persons ~ {!t FROM: Lee A. York, Senior Plann RE: Request by Mildred W oodi DATE: October 11, 1990 Attached is a copy of a letter from Mildred Woodin requesting that the Zoning Board of Appeals review Dave Hatin's interpretation of a quick launch and sales lot allowed on the 4Z acre tract in which Dunham's Bay Boat Company has a storage building. This item of business will be reviewed at the October 17, 1990 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the Planning Office. LA Y Ised Attachment "HOME OF NATURAL BEAUTY. . . A GOOD PLACE TO liVE" SETTLED 1763 - ·' . Ø9I'2'''9~1 e2 a 1 '18 ~89 2'68 no fER WHSE - 81 FILE COpy ;(~ãW . ....~ St/'251990" ;~~N'NQ . ZON,þI' eD.ATM..... ., j 1 .~ ., ., Mildred Woodin 1517 Third Avenue Watervl1et, NY 12189 September 25, 1990 ., '] ;, 1 Town of Queenlbury Ray & Heviland Ro.d Queen.bury, NY 12804-9725 Fax # 792-5203 Dear Ks tee York: we received a letter from Mr. Davi~ Hatin regarding his interpretation of a quick launch and sales lot. being allowed on the 42 acre tract in which Dunham's BAy Boat Company has a storage building. wo do not agree with his interpretation therefore, we request you to submit our paper work to the Board ot Appeals for their consideration. Thank you tor your intere.t. SincerelY, Mildred Woodin Earl Short.le.vea John Salvador Gilbert Boeh. John Schriner -.---- ,~...- n '- --'-~ ¡~ . ! . '. " .. . , -- -- Queensbury Town Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Queens bury Office Building Bay @ Haviland Road Que ens bury, Ny 12804 June 15,1990 Re: Request for interpretation from the Queensbury Town Zoning Board of Appeals We are requesting an interpretation of the Town OfQucensbury Zoning Ordinance with referenœ t.o quick laWlch tàcilities. This pertains directly to the Dunhams Bay Boat Co. Ine Boat Storage facility. The ordinance( section 4.020-a) anows conunercial boat storage as Type II pemùted use in the Land Conservation--42 acre zone. Conunerci.a1 Boat Storage is defined as fonows (Town of Queens bury. Zoning Ordinance) 29. "Boat Storage, Commercial" means a place ,site or structure used to park, house or store on anyone lot, more than three (3) uessels,eHceptlng canoes, rowboats or sailboats under eighteen (18) feet Including any rental of prluate residential docks. The Dunharns Bay Boat Company was issued a Special Use Pennit on Nov 15. 1972 to have a boat storage tàcility on lot 10-1-19.2. This storage area is aaoss State Highway Rt 91 and is not contiguous with the Lake Front property. This was approved for boat storage only and was not considered to be part of the Marina with the fonowing Iinútations: 1. Max Boat length 24' 2. AU boats to be stored within a building 3. No tra.i1ers left outside a building 4. No work perfonned on boats outside the building (Minutes ofSpecia1 Use Permit #35 Nov.15,1972 attached). The definition of a Marina in the Town Ordinance 162. "Marina" meens any waterfront facility which prouides accommodation seruices for uessels by engaging in any of the following: 1) The sale of marine products or seruices; 2) The sale, lease, rentel or charter of uessels of eny type; or 3) The sole, lease, rental or any other prouislon of storage,wharf space, or mooring for uessels not registered to the owner of said facility, a member of the owner's Immediate femily, the owner or leesee of the Immediately adjoining upland property, members of their Immediate family, or an ouernlght guest on said property. This deñnition docs not address boat storage and by virtue of that di1ferentiates between boat storage facility and a Marina. The Dunhams Bay Boat Company has begun to úse the Boat Storage faci1ity as a quick D- , . ----.... .-",,"'- , .. .. 'I'" · '- -- laWlch site for their marina. A" Quick Launch Facility" is definedin the Town of Queens bury's Zoning Ordinance as: 228. "Quick Launch Facility" means a commercial facility, located within a marina, where uessels are stored, launched and stored again indiuidually for periods of less than one week at a time. c z This definition describes the quick la1.Ulch as being integral to a Marina and not part of the boat storage facility. o The Town ofQucensbury Zoning Administration has dctcnnincd that the Dunharns Bay Boat Storage facility could--eTmmd with site plan review because ofSection4.020-a. ,~-~ ..L..£.-/.7 , The reality ofthc situation is that the detcmúnation did not address the currently ill.cgal quick launching going on at thc site and the sale of boats going on at the sitc.(Lctters to the Town of Queens bury Planning Board attached) Our request to the Zoning Board of Appeals is for an interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance to detennine whether; 1. Is a Boat Storage Facility the same or part of a Marina? 2. Is a Quick Launch F aci1ity the s amc or part of a Boat Storage F aci1ity? 3. Is a Quick Launch Facility or Marina for boat sales allowable in a 42 acre zone in Queensbury? Our contention is that the Dunhams Bay 'Special Permit Boat storage Facility" has become a boat sales and a quick launch facility. These uses are not allowed In the LC-42 acre zone and therefore are a uiolation of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance. RespcctfuUy yours. ~¿~tw Gilbert 0 Boehm 1367 Rt 9L Dunhams a Lake George II) < /7; . uJ~ ~OOdin 1517-3rdAve. Watervliet.NY 12189 ~~~ Earl Shorts1eeves PtJ Box 66 W ynantskill NY 12198 ohn S ado" Dunhams's Bay Lodge Box1179 Lake George. NY 12845 cflf. .2~ l-. John Schriner 68 Northvie w Wynantskill. NY 12198 D- -- "~ September 20, 1990 MR. JOHN SCHRINER 68 Northview Wynantskill, New York 12198 Dear Mr. Schriner: This letter is in reference to your July 11 request for an interpretation of the Town of Queensbury Zoni ng Ordinance for the Dunham's Bay Boat Company boat storage facility. After reviewing your letter and giving much thought to this response, I have concluded the following in regards to your questions: 1. Your fi rst questi on was "i s a boat storage faci 1 ity the same or part of a marina?" As you described in your letter dated July 11, 1990, boat storage "commercial" means a place, site or structure used to park, house or store on anyone lot more than three (3) vessels excepting canoes, row boats or sail boats under 18 feet including any rental or private residential docks. It would be my conclusion that this is part of a marina by the fact that boats are used in a marina and stored in a marina as well as in a boat storage facility. ,.». 2. Your second questi ons was "i s a qui ck 1 aunch facil i ty the same or part of a boat storage facility?" By definition of a quick launch facility meaning a commercial facility located within a marina where vessels are stored, launched· and stored again individually for period of less than one (1) week at a time. I would have to say that a quick launch facility is not part of a boat storage facility. However, where boats are stored for periods of longer than one week, I would say that this is not considered a quick launch facility by definition and therefore al though the boats may be removed from time to time, this boat storage facility is not considered part of the quick launch facility. 3. Your third question was "is a quick launch facility or marina for boat sales allowable in an LC42 Zone?" In answer to the first part of the question, a quick launch facility would not be allowed in an LC42 Zone because boat storage is the only permitted use there. A quick laun,ch facility by definition must be located within a marina. - --" \ Also keeping in mind that this is when boats are removed and put in the water for periods of less than one (1) week. If boats are stored for periods longer than one week and periodically placed in the water, then this is not considered a quick launch facility. In answer to the second part of your question: "is a marina for boat sales allowable in an LC42 Zone?", I think we have to break this question apart: . 1. Dunham's Bay Boat Company does store boats for.s~l e in the boat storage facility which is allowed. 2. The next part of the question becomes "when does this sale occur". It would be my conclusion that because all transactions of paperwork and monies are conducted at the marina, that the storage of boats for sale at the boat storage facility is not a violation of the Queensbury Zoning Ordinance and therefore the boats for sal e are allowed to be stored at thi s facility. I trust this will answer your questions adequately. If not, please respond to me in writing for clarifications or any other questions or comments you may have. Very truly yours, ,"" DAVID HATIN, DIRECTOR BLDG. & CODE ENFORCEMENT DH/jjd '-' tiLc L>. J v~ ..- Þ~'S~: UXd../~C ·/a, 1990 NOTICE OF PUBUC BEARINGS Pursuant to section lZ.060 of an ordinance of the Town of Queensbury entitled ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY and SIGN ORDINANCE, notice is hereby given that the Town Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Queensbury will conduct public hearings on Wed.D.eøday, December 19, 1990 at 7:30 p.m. at the Queensbury Town Office Building (Meeting Place: Queensbury Center Building), Bay and Haviland Roads to consider the following Variance applkations: Notice of Appeal No. 4-90 Interpretation of Zoning Ordinance with reference to quick launch facilities. This pertains directly to the Dunham's Bay Boat Company, Inc. Boat Storage Facility. Gilbert O. Boehm, John Salvador, Earl Shortsleeves, Mildred Woodin, and John Schriner. Request for Interpretation By: 1. Is a Boat Storage Facility the same or part of a Marina? Z. Is a Quick Launch Facility the same or part of a Boat Storage Facility? 3. Is a Quick Launch Facility or Marina for boat sales allowable in a 4Z acre zone m Queensbury? Tax Map No. 10-1-19.2 Special Use Permit No. 35 granted: 1l/15/7Z Notice of Appeal No. 5-90: The Planning D'oard is appealmg the decision of the Zoning Administrator in the matter of the Hogan Site Plan No. 76-90. The Planning Board is in agreement that Section 9.011B of the Zoning Ordinance applies to this property. Town of Queensbury Signed: WedDnday, December lZ, 1990 Susan Goetz, Secretary - Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York Dated: ~._-_._~ ,..~ -- -../f" . - TOWN OF QUEENSBURY r ~ I F L _ 531 Bay Road, Queensbury, NY 12804·9725 (518) 792-5832 COpy October 25, 1990 Theodore Turner Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Queensbury 531 Bay Road Queensbury, New York 1Z804 Dear Mr. Turner: The purpose of this letter is to request that the attached matter be placed on the Zoning Board agenda at the earliest possible time. The reason for the request is that the Planning Board feels that we will be confronted with this situation again, and we would like a definitive interpretation. Sincerely, ZB;:~;:OARD Peter J. Cartier Vice Chairman PJC/sed Attachment "HOME OF NA rURAL BEAUTY. . . A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE" SETTLED 1763 '- . - TOWN OF QUEENSBURY 531 Bay Road, Queensbury, NY 12804-9725 (518) 792-5832 REQUEST FOR AN INTERPRET A nON Article 9, Section 9.011B. The Planning Board of the Town of Queensbury is requesting an interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to Section 9.0 lIB. Section 9.011 A single family dwelling or mobile home may be enlarged or rebuilt as follows: A. All setback provisions of this Ordinance shall be met; and B. No enlargement or rebuilding shall exceed an aggregate of fifty percent (50%) of the gross floor area of such single family dwelling or mobile home immediately prior to the commencement of the first enlargement or rebuilding. In our review of the Hogan site plan, the Planning Board concluded that the Hogan's should have applied for a variance from the aforementioned section. We requested an explanation from Pat Collard, Zoning Administrator, as to why this was not required. Mrs. Collard's letter is attached. The Hogan's (Site Plan No. 76-90) intent is to demolish an existing seasonal camp and build a single family residence on the same footprint. (You may recall reviewing this application as a variance procedure from Section 7.077 - frontage on a Town Road). The Hogan's application clearly states that the gross floor area of the residence is 994 sq. ft. and that an addition of 816 sq. ft., in the form of a second floor will be added (application attached). The Planning Board is in agreement that Section 9.011B applies. That section states that a single family dwelling may be enlarged or rebuilt provided that no enlargement or rebuildinrl sba11 exceed an aggregate of 50 percent of the gross floor area immediately prior to the commencement of the first enlargement or rebuilding. Mrs. Collard believes that this me.. that at least one expansion must have· already taken place. The Plann;..g Staff was requested to review the files to ascertain what the past practice of the Town with regard to this section of the law had been. On October 18, 1989, the Zoning Board of Appeals had a submission regarding Alice MacLean James (Area Variance No. 117-1989) on the agenda (attached). The request was to tear down an existing "HOME OF NA rURAL BEAUTY. . . A GOOD PLACE TO liVE" SETTLED 1763a L~. "._____ ~__ __._ - --../ . stn1cture, maintain existing floor dimensions and add a second story. On this submission Mrs. Collard determined that a variance from Section 9.011B was required. Clearly, ther~ is some inconlÍstency about how this section is to be applied, and we would appreciate an interpretation on the intent of this section from your Board. Sincerely, QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD Attachment -.--------~ - -- . - TOWN OF QUEENSBURY Bay at Haviland Road, Oueensbuty, NY 12804-9725-518-792.5832 M E M 0 RAN DUM TO: Stuart Baker, Assistant Planner and Planning Board Members Patricia Collard, Zoning Administrator /""\ ;.1 FROM: RE: Site Plan 176-90, Michael & Martha Hogan DATE: October 22, 1990 I am replying to Stu's memo of October 17, 1990 and to Peter J. Cartier's memo on b~half of the Planning Board dated October 18, 1990 in one memo as they are redundant therefore will receive identical replies. The above referenced sfte was reviewed and approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals on August 15, 1990. The application was an Area Variance from Section 7.077 of the Queensbury Zoning Ordinance that states: II every principal bu11ding shat1 be bu11t upon a lot with frontage upon a publ1c street improved to meet the standards of the Town of Queensbury." I interpreted thi s appli cati on to need only that Vari ance and non. other as this is not an expansion. The exfsitng residence is to be d8l101fshed and a new residence constructed. A bu11ding permit w111 be obtained for a new building not an expansion. In reference to cOlllll8nts of increased percentage, I can only assLmll this concerns Article 9, Section ..9.011B that states "no enl argement or re-bu11ding shall exceed an aggregate of ·501 of the gross floor area of such single family dwet1ing or mob11e home illlllldiately prior to the commencement of the first enlargement 0.. rebutlding. II I interpret this to mean an expansion has al ready taken place. In Mr. Cartf...· s ..-0 he asks why thfs particiular application was not required to appe... before the Zoning Board for a Variance request given the fact it is located in a designated Critfcal Environmental Area. I a. not fam11iar with a sectfon of the Zoning Ordinance that would require a Critical Environmental Area to appear before the· Zoning Board. If you have further questions I w111 be happy to meet with you at any ti.. CC: Town Board. Paul Dusek, Karla Corpus. Planning Board Members. Lee York, Dave Hatin "HOME OF NA rURAL BEAUTY. . . A GOOO Pl.ACE TO UVE" SEmEO 1m .....--- Type I or Clus A: -- ~ Jown 0/ fo!ueøndbu"1 ... ·RESIDENTIAL SITB "PLAN RBVIEW APPLICATION To Be ante.eeI By: QueeD8bury pt."";,,, Board Adirondack Park Agency RefelTa1: - WalTen County Planning RefelTa1: . - Received by: (initial) - ~. APPUCA110M tfO..qa 1 Date Submitted to Department Type n or Claaa B: o g Date Accepted and Fee Receive (amount) ~ r.>-. 1. Applicant's Name: Matha L. Hogan and Michael Hogan Street Address: 1378 Braewick Drive l-brgantown, W.V. 26505 Is this an applicatior for an Ameadmeat to a previously APPROVED Site Plar City, State, Zip: Telephone No. -------.. - ~04) 59~-9374 (7i3-5556) Yes V' No 2. Agent: Street Address: Mi chi'!.p-l .1. 0' C'nnnnr 19 west Notre Dame Street. P.O. Box 898 City, State, Zip: Glens Falls. New York 12801 (c;n~) 7Q'-'111 Telephone No. 3. Owner's Name: Martha L. Hogan and Michael Hogan .1378 Braewìck Drive Street Addre..: City, State, Zip: r.hr~nTr-MI"I r w. v. 'Fic;Oc; Telephone No. (304 599- 9374 (793-5556) 4. Ownership Intentiona, i.e., purchase optional ~ to <:1eIoolish the existing c~ anDA~l 41-1-15 anò TPrn1ilñ nn Th_ q~ F~prin~ 5.' Property Location: Tax Map # 41 - 1 - 35 Pinnppr PoinT. r.lpn T..:!I1cp 6. Desaiption of how to find the property: Go to the end of Fitzgerald Road where the macadem ends. qO straiqht to the tj,o of Pioneer Point, the Hq Jan r.Æ1¡) i~ ThP- y~11nw ('"~ hø~'·'-"n ~h_ whi~¡:, .::Inti hll1_ t"""nps. 7. IN THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW, draw an overview (aitelocation) of where your property is located in the Town of Queenabury. Show nortb aITOW, street corners (name tbem) and identify your property. note. tbia pU'ticu1al' map does not have to be drawn to scale. .. -. ..... - 1 3 .. ., .-/ - 7 A. State the section of the Zoning Ordinance which requires that this proposal have Site Plan Re.view: 7.07fi ~p;:u::nnA1 nwøl1inq rrnit Conversion 8. Tax Map Numbera Section: & 1 Block: 1 Lot: '1 ¡; 9. Zone CluaifcatiOlu WR-1A 10. Is the lot in question within 500 feet of a County or a State Right of Way or Park, Municipal Boundary, or watershed draining any County or State facilities, requiring review of the WARREN CCUNTY PLANNING BOARD: Yes: No: x 11. List all required County, State, Federal permits, approvals, and status: None 1Z. Present Use of Property: Residential Dwellinq 13. Proposed Use of Property: describe the· proposed project: Residential Dwellinq 14. A. B. c. Total Lot Acre.... Total Sit. ·Area/sq.tplre feet or acrea: Total Gro.Flocr Area of Residence(s) (n." cOUtl'Uction) 1 C\. ,,..,.A a 8,253 994 +/- . sq. ft. D. Total Grou Flocr Area of Addition 816 sq. ft. Present bldg. has no second floor 15. Any previoua Plaønial or Zoning Board determinatioD8 made regarding thta property? Yes No x If yea, please atat. previous application number(s): aDd Applicaøt'a namel 16. Any deed reatrictiou, e..ments, or covanent.? Yes xx No If yea, pIe.. explain in detail: Property has a 20 foot wide deeded right of way to Fitzgerald Road: Lot was created June 21, 1957 before zoning existed. Z -._~ -- - 17. A. A.nticipated date to start construction: B. Anticìpated date to finish construction: UDOn aDDroval 5/30/91 C. Ple.... provide the following information (use additional pages if necessary): 1. An estimated project construction schedule: Demolition 9/1- 9/15 . i'ramiag t¡3omplet.ð 11/~O/qO Tn~A~in~ fini~h by ~/91 18. Character of sUITounding lands (Suburban, Commercial, Industrial, Wetlands, etc.): Residential dwellinq and waters of Glen Lake 19. CUlTent condition of Site {buildings, brush, open field, forest)¡{esiden~ial dwelling 2.0. Cun-ent Sewage Disposal System (condition, type, tank size, location). Condition to be determined by inspection of system by appropriate authorities. Septic tank with leach bed which is intended to be removed and rep1.~~Añ 111' hn1 ñ'''"1 tillAk .!! thia site plaa ia within 500 feet of a body of water and involves the addition of habitable space ar increases the use of the property (conversion from seasonal uae) the requirement of the attached checkliat (letter H) must be addre.... by a liceued enain.... 2.1. PropoMci Sewa¡e DispouJ System (type, tank aize, location): Holding tank Der town regulations designed by Raymond Irish, P.E. 2.2.. Ust the name. and location of the parcel (Include Tax Map Number and Zone) of adjoinina property ownen: HOW TO USE THE TAX MAPS Every property in Queensbury is identified by a number. The.. numben relate to the Town Tax Map.. Each parcel haa a 3 number code by which you can locate it in the Town. . If you know the name of the perIOD who ow... the prop6rly you can find the Tu Map Nwuber of the parcel by lookinl up the penœ in the "~""'-tical ~ Baak·. Thia liatiq has the ownen name aDd identifies hia property by the tax map Dumber. 3 · ' -... ~ If you have a Tax Map Number but need to know the owner you look in the "Numerical LiadDø Book-. This book identifies the property owners. If you omy know the property location and need to find the owner, the adjacent neilhbcn or tbe zODin¡, you need to 10 to the Tax Map. The first sheet of the tax maps ahows the Town broken into a number of areas which are numbered. These areas indicate whicb map (below the cover sheet) to look onto for the property. This map number is also the first number of the tax map identification number. For example, in number 3Z-Z-lZ.3, the 3Z indicates Section Number 32. The Section Number appears, in the lower rilht hand corner of the map. Once you are on the cOlTect map you need to find the Block Number. The Block Number ia the second number on the tax map. For example, in 3Z-Z-lZ.3, the Z is the Block Number. The Block Number usually has a circle around it. The last number of the tax map is the parcel number. For example, 12.3 would indicate the exact piece of property. This number ia usually on the map parcel or has an aITOW indicatin¡ to which parcel it belonla. If you have to identify property or adjacent properties for an application it is very important that you accurately identify the numbers. The first number is the Section Number. The second number is the Block Number and the third number is the Parcel Number. NORTHERLY: Tax Map Number: n/ a Zone: Name: waters of Glen Lake Location: north SOUTHERLY: Tax Map Number: 41-1-34 Zone: WR~lA Name: William H. Barton Location: South EASTERLY: Tax Map Number: 41-1-36 Zone: Wr-1A Name: RobF!rf- ;lnñ F-ñ;f-h J.I"9h.. Location: East w.sTBRLY: Tax Map Number: n/a Zone: Name: waters of Glen Lake Location: west " ~-~ - Qòee.vi 5\oV-r~ ~O\\J. ~ 'Oocu...ck ð\ \l\-ff" ~ \ls CtJ-c.~ \. ~ \ \'\8"~ -- , . Area Variance No. Type: Unlisted Area Variance No. Type: Unlisted Area Variance No. Type II Area Variuce No. Types UnUatecl Use Variance No. Type: Unliated -' 116-1989 John Carusone, Michael Muller, SFR-IA Robert Muller Z50 Bay Street, west side of Bay Road, south of railraod track A profnv~·1 I&w ofllce ia aUowed by a Y8riaDce iDitially granted July 1988. Since that date. aDd prior to fhl.li~ the reqolliñ-_talor a b-tild, permit. the DeW œdbumce ~Id greaterlWtltc:tioaa u to stream setback aDd le.f......eDta u to JNII'IdDø. (Wan-en County Planning) Tax Map No. 106-3-9 Section 7.07Z (1), 7.0lZ (A)3 Lot size: 1.3 acres Public Hearing: October 18, 1989 117-1989 Alice MacLean James Pilot Knob Road, Warner Bay, Lake George, ~ müe from 9L on Pilot Knob Road, second camp on left To tear down the esiatiDø 8'tractUre. mamtaJa eziatiDg ßoor cüm-mou, add a øec:oad dOl'f. aDd small perch. (Adirondack Park Agency) (WaITen County Planning) Tax Map No. 19-1-Z9 Section 9.011 B, 9.010 Lot size: approx. 5,544 sq. ft. Public Hearing: October 18, 1989 WR-1A 118-1989 Karen J. Witte MR-5 Ca thy Clothier west side of Bay Road, ~ müe south of the Town Hall To create . lot that is ·~I. ftriaDce from the req-dhd 75 It. setback tra. the brook is required. ~ ia to c.__t..u:t a b--ildw.ø for cGmmerda1 ... (bateadecl u a DOl 1r-mw.ø CeDter). (WæTen County Planning) Tax Map No. 60-7-4.1 Section 7.01Z, 3' Lot size: 1.79 acres Public Hearing: October 18, 1989 119-1989 James M. Weller south of Walkup Cutoff Road, southwest of intersection of Bay Road and Route 149 For cOD8tl'uC:tiaD of a ...... 1InIw"-1 withiD tbe 50 ft. buffer ..... (Warren County Planning) Tax Map No. 48-1-Z6 Section 4.0Z0-k, 7.079' Lot size: 11.Z5 ± acres Public Hearinl: October 18, 1989 HC-1A 1Z0-1989 James M. Weller south of Walkup Cutoff Road, southwest of intersection of Bay Road and Route 149 Far e2'p--'- of a ¡¡&6 TwI-tIDø acacœfca'IIÙIIØ U8e. HC-1A (WæTen County p).,nd"g) Tax Map No. 48-1-Z6 Section 4.0Zo-k . Lot size. 11.Z5 ± acres Public Heariq: Octob.. 18, 1989 j next pqe f . k ~ -- I . - r:ltÇ TOWN OF QUEENSBURY 531 S.y ROMI, Queensbury, NY 1280~9725 (518) 792·5832 :- ~ 0 Y L- ;.J . TO: Pat Collard, Zoning Administrator FIIØI: Stu Baker, Assistant Planner .A}j,ß . DAD: October 17, 1990 RI: Site Plan 76-90 Michael and Martha Hogan Attached is the transcript of a discussion held by the Planninl Board last evening relardinl the variances necessary for the above referenced project. The Planning Board has requested that you issue a written opinion as to why a variance from Section 9.011(b) of the Ordinance was not needed for this project. The Planninl Dept. will forward the opinion to the Planninl Board as soon as we receive it. SB/pw Attachment "HOME OF NATUA.ð.L BEAUTY. . . A GooO PLACE TO LIVE" SETTLEO 1783 Ie ~js1 - t~ TOWN OF QUEENSBURY F 1 L E [ 0 p·Y 531 S.y ROlId, OUHnsbury, NY 1280~9725 (518) 792·5832 '-' ~~ TOI FROMa DATBa Pat Collai'd PI.""I"1 Board Members October 18, 1990 RBI Site Plan No. 76-90, Michael and Martha Hogan Dear Pat. At the October 16 Planning Board meeting we dealt with Site Plan No. 76-90, Michael and Martha Hogan on Glen Lake. In the course of our discussions a question arose as to the rationale and reasons why this partic:u1ar application was not required to appear before the Zoning Board for a !arianc. request, given the fact that it is located in a designated Critical Environmental Are.. WR-IA, is a very small lot (0.19 acres), and that the expansion wu conaid.erable, both in terms of square footage (going from 900+ FTZ to 1700+ FTZ) and use (seuoaa! to year-roUDd). The Board took stronl exception to the fact that this application wu not subject to variance proceduru. A readinl of the attached minutes will better illustn.te our conCer'118. By rnolution, the PI.""I"1 Board requests that your office provide us with the buica and reasona for the deciaicm to exempt this particular lite plan from ZoniDø Boai'd review. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, QU~BURY PLANNING BOARD -/2';.'t;t~ Vice Chairman PJC/_ cc. Town Board Paul Du.k PI.""'''I Board memb... "HOME OF NATURAL BEAUTY. . . A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE" SETTLED 1783 ., . .- ~ ~js, - -- - TOWN OF QUEENSBURY Say" Haviland Road, Queenabuly, NY 12804-9725-51 B-79~5832 M E M 0 RAN DUM TO: Stuart Baker. Assistant Planner and Planning Board Members FROM: RE: DATE: ,~ Patricia Collard. Zoning Administrator J~l( Site Plan 176-90. Michael a Martha Hogan October 22. 1990 I am replying to Stu's memo of October 17. 1990 and to Peter J. Cartier's memo on behalf of the Planning Board dated October 18. 1990 i,n one memo as they are redundant therefore will receive identical replies. The above referenced site was reviewed and approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals on August 15. 1990. The application was an Area Variance fro. Section 7.077 of the Queensbury Zoning Ordinance that states: .. every principal building sha11 be built upon a lot with frontage upon a public street improved to ..t the standards of the Town of Queensbury. II I interpreted this application to need only that Variance and non. other as this is not an expansion. The exis1tng, res1denc. is to be d..,1shecl and a new residence constructed. A building permit will be obtained for a new building not an expansion. . In reference to c....nts of increased percentage. I can only ass... this concerns Article 9. Section. 9.0118 that states "no enlargement or re-build1ng sha11 exceed an aggregate of 501 of the gross floor area of such s1ngl. fu11y dwe111ng or IIObile IaIe illlllediately prior to the COl1llleftc.....t of the first enlarg_nt or rebund1ng." I interpret this to _an an expansion has already taken plac.. In Mr. Cartf.r's 1.-0 he asks why this part1ciular application was not required to appear before the Zoning Board for a Variance request give the fact it is located in a designated Critical Environmental Area. I.. not f.U1ar with a section of the Zoning Ordinance that would require a Critical Enviro...ntal Area to appear before the' Zoning Board. If you hay. further questions I will be happy to meet with you at any time. CC: Town Board. Paul Dusek. Karla Corpus. Planning Board Mellbers. Lee York. Dave Hatin "HOME OF NA TURAL BEAUTY. . . A GOOO PlACE TO UVE" SEmED 1783 . ~--_."._-_...~ .~ MR. CARTIER-We eaid that we wanted Adminietrator, or a resolution. to make ~"'f\C·Y\C --:~ - wvu1'V\~D<*. l~\ lOU{ò ;j.."A. 0.ec..t S L oý\.. . a motion regarding the Zoning - MR. CAIMANO-Well, let's start it off, Mr. Chairman. We're put in the position, by a number of people, including the Zoning Administrator, of facing an applicant where there ie clearly, not a violation, it is a... MR. CARTIER-Nonconformance. MR. CAIMANO-It is a nonconforming use and subject to a Zoning Regulation that has been clearly overlooked and it is one that has been the moet important one. It is a grossly undersized lot in a one acre zone. It is next to an environmentally sensitive body of water and yet, it wasn't even considered when it was brought before this Board, that we know of, because nobody mentioned it. So, 1 gueu what we'd like to do, correct me, Mr. Chairman, if I'm wrong, is to, somehow get notification to the Zoning Administrator that, at least some of us on this Board, and maybe ~ll of us, are concerned about this because it puts us in a bad position in front of the public. It is a situation where we are setting a precedent that may come home to haunt us and it need not have been done because, somewhere along the line, as Stu put it so nicely and, yet, unfortunately, in the wrong context, several people have looked at this first and yet it got here with a clear violation of our regulations. MR. CARTIER-Okay, and, maybe this helps. In talking with Paul Dusek about a whole bunch of thinge, last week, I was talking about, suppose we have a question about the legal aspects of an issue and he said, wll, the best thing for you to do until you get the legal aspects cleared up, but I think that's different from what you're talking about. I think what you're trying to do, here, what we're trying to do, is flag the Zoning Adminhtrator or scmebody that, hey, scmething was amiss, here, and how do we avoid having it happen again. MRS. PULVER-Well, I think having Stuart request an opinion from the Zoning Adminhtrator, as to when she feels a variance would be needed for what amount of size. I mean, does she feel a 50 percent increase, an 80 percent increase. I mean, this is an 82 percent increase, right? MR. CAIMANO-Well, she doesn't get a chance to feel. It's clear in the Regulations. It says, 50 percent. The regulation is clear. MR. BAKER-Mrs. Pulver, that requeet for clarification on that really should come from the Board and not from the Planning Staff. MRS. PULVER-No, I mean, you could request from the Planning Board. MR. CAIMANO~He's talking about in the process. MRS. PULVER-Yes. MR. BAKER-Yes. MR. MARTIN-What I think might, just to tie this down, that, in the future, anytime that there's a project before us that involvee a nonconforming uee, they simply have to, in their determination, or in correepondence to this Board, cite, Section by Section, right out of the Ordinance, their opiI1ion, so we cover it. So, that way, she can make a notation in her written determination, you know, Section 9.011, you know, Enlargements, you know, she states right out, not an issue, or whatever, but that she has to go right through each one, in any case where there's a nonconforming uee for etructures. MS. CORPUS-I believe that she did cover this ileue, but the problem ie, again, for the Board, that it Wall not in the letter. MR. BAKER-It wasn't documented anywhere. MS. CORPUS-It wasn't documented anywhere. MR. MARrIN-That's what I mean, there'e no documentation. MS. CORPUS-The only thing that was documented in the letter was what was required, not what was not required and I think if both aspect. of that i'.ue were covered, then you would be clear. 1 ............. ..- MR. MARTIN-And, to go beyond just making the determination, but some sort of explanation alona with it. MS. CORPUS-Yes. MR. CAIMANO-My question to you. You said that earlier and my quution to you, without belaboring this point, is, how could that be? It is the single most important item on this whole thing. MR. BAKER-We canlt speak for the Zoning Administrator. MS. CORPUS-I can't speak for her. MR. CAIMANO-Then how can you be so sure that she went through this? MS. CORPUS-Because, 1 was there, but 1 don't want to put words into her mouth, as to her rationale, and I would definitely think the Board, if you feel you would like her to write a letter to you, regarding that determination, I don't see a problem with that. MR. CAIMANO-I guess my suggestion is that, somehow, the Chairman just communicate some unhappiness. MR. BAKER-Just for the Planning Board's information, the Zoning Administrator dou document, Section by Section, from the Ordinance, what applies, in termll of what Sections an applicant needs variances from and what sectionll require that the applicant get Site Plan Review. That is in written form and the Planning Department does have a copy of t hat on file. That is done every time she determinell, you know, meets with an applicant and determinell what procellll they need to go throu¡h. So, it's documented in that form, but, as you're correctly pointina out, she doesn't document what Sections do not apply and for what reallons she feels they don't apply and that may be part of the problem. MR. MARrIN-And I particularly stress the reasons for the determination. MR. CAIMANO-R;f.ght. MR. MARTIN-Because I can see it, it's coming about, now, like, for example, the Docksider. We're having an issue over the parking and she has just come out and made a statement that it's not an issue, or that she's made an interpretation about there being two U8ell present. I want some reasoning behind that. MR. CAIMANO-Ye., I think that, if we made an issue of this thina and Jim certainly did make an is.ue of thill thing, then, to me, correct me if I'm wrong, Peter, she should be here, when that case comes up, to defend her position because, as a matter of fact, this Board finds that, or at least one member of this Board finds that to be a very significant issue and to just dismiu it ill ridiculous, on it's surface, because the applicant now thinks it's a nonissue when, in fact, the Board thinks it is an issue and we don't have any idea what the Zonina Adminilltrator'" thinking. Of course, that's pretty natural, anyway. I have no idea what the Zonina Administrator thinks in this Town, anyway. MR. CARrIER-Is this a solution? determinations~ include" reasons and also cite" "pecific things determinations, would that satisfy If the Zoning Administrator, in writina her by which .he has reached those determinations in the Ordinance that hall led her to those this Board? MR. BAKER-Well, the problem is, that's what .he's already doing. I mean, that'" what she's already doing. She documents why certain variances are needed and why Site Plan Review is needed. She ~~ document why other typell of variances are not needed. MR. MARrIN-Well, that can be just all critical to the case. MR. BAKER-And'I aaree, but I think that... MS. COBPUS-See, the problem in that is that could cover anythina that'll left in the Zoning Ordinance, from A to Z, which would require a lot of, if the Board has a special concern with nonconfo~ing uses, I could see limiting it to a certain area where you would like to see it, each time it come. before the Board, .aying 2 .. - '- -...,./ MR. CAIMANO-Hald it. Ju.t a second, and I don't want to get you or her all upset over this thing. tame, and apparently to Jim, and maybe to somebody else, if you'll speak up ar nat .peak up, it is a very simple thing. It'. common sense. We are dealing with .omebady who's on a grossly nonconfarming lot next to a sensitive piece of water. It is an almost 100 percent increase in the size. Thatl. not significant? I mean, it's just common sense. That's all we're asking for, is to' look at the thing on the common sense basis. How can she ~ say something to us? How could this man get to this point, and not even know it's an iuue? He never even knew it was an issue. How could he not? It's as clear as the hair on your head, if you will. It's clear. It's a nonconforming lot, grouly. Here's what it says about nonconforming lot.. Somebody ought to say something. NO'. It comes here. We've got to vote on it. What we should have done is turn the the thing down, frankly. It's clearly in violation. Not just a little bit in vialation, a big bit in violation, almost 100 percent, and nobody, in this Whale process, thought enough of that to tell the applicant. They thought about everything else, but not this. It went before the ~ Board. MR. CARTIER-Okay. So what's the solution? MR. CAIMANO-Just cammunicate, I guess. MR. CARrIER-Well, I'd like to come up with something specific, here. MR. MARrIN-I think, as you stated it earlier, those written determinations, as well as the reasoning behind them, would be a start. MR. CARrIER-Okay, Karla, I'm calling on you, here. You started to talk about limiting it to certain kinds of areas. MS. CORPUS-I just see a practical problem, in that, given this, this particular issue, if the Board ha.' a concern with that, that's fine, but I'm .aying, maybe there's other thing. that other people feel just as strongly abaut, in other Sections of the Ordinance, it could be a problem, in that, the rest of t~ Ordinance is rather large and cumbersome and to write an opinian stating, well, I, dan't think Article Seven applies. I mean, even if, granted, only the obviaus thing.. I'm not talking about things that no one would go. MR. CAIMANO-Right. MS. CORPUS-But I'm .aying, in the case, I see this coming up, time and time again, specifically an nancanfarming structures and uses, that seems to' be one cancern that need. a lat af interpretation. MR. CAIMANO-Bight. MS. CORPUS-That Sectian always needs interpretation, that an Article Eight. Those are the two that seem to' come up most often, Article Eight and Article Nine, becau.e they're the mast vague. MR. BAKER-To narraw it a little bit, we're dealing, specifically, with preexi.ting, nanconfarming .tructure. or uses. MS. CORPUS-Bight. MR. CAIMANO-Well, let me try something else, here. With the exceptian of Ed, what. relatively new, the rest of us have been around, together, for several manth., and there certainly ha. been, when you guys get together in yaur Planning Department, there is a sense of what this Baard like. and daesn't like and I think that the Zaning Administrator hasn't a clue, for whatever reason, and I think it'. up to' the Zaning Administrator, ju.t as we have to' think abaut yau guys and think af yau as an enviranmentalist and Jahn as a practical per.an, when we talk to' yau, I think it'. incumbent upon you to' think abaut what the tenar af thi. Baard is. It's very abviaus. If Jim Hagan had been here tanight, he wauld have gane nut.. He wauld have said, no. He would have refused, becauee yau knaw haw he is abaut, if yau don't knaw, you should know, how he 18 abaut nonconforming. He'. the fir.t guy to bring the iSlue up. So, I think, what shauld happen, 18, ju.t as you know \18, maybe she shauld, and Dave shauld, alea. Maybe somebady shauld clue them in, hey, the guy's a wacka down at the end of the table. Yau aught to' be careful of this. MR. MAlaIN-Well, no, all I'm saying is, in this example that was here befare us, tonight, that that' shauld have been given a variance which cited that specific Sectian. I'm not saying to say, nO', this individual can't have their camp expanded, but ju.t that it's 3 . . '- -- MRS. PULVER-they ehould have applied for a variance at that time. MR. MARtIN-Ye.. MR. BAKER- I underetand, completely, what the Board is øayi ng and I agree with what you're øaying, Nick, that, perhapø, the Zoning Administrator doeøn' t have that same understanding. MR. CAlMANO-Okay. How's it gøing to be conveyed? MR. CARtIER-Would it help if we had from her, her reasoning behind thiø one? MR. CAlMANO-I øure would like to hear it. MR. CARtIER-Well, can we do øomething? MR. BAKER-I'd recommend wordø to that effect. MR. MARtIN-Or maybe just t in future caøeØ of nonconforming uøeø, just have that reasoning in each project that involves a nonconforming uøe, that would be a øtart. MS. CORPUS-Bight, and I'd øay also, from being here for some time, now, is Article Eight 18 another one of t hose wonderful ones which 18, definitely nonconforming uøes, but lot dze., that has to do with two small lotø and adjoinder and that sort of thing. MR. CAlMANO-Okay. Well, I would like to hear what the rationale was for not mentioning this and why the applicant never got... MR. CARtIER-Can you turn that into a resolution and we can act on it, ae a Board. MR. CAlMANO-Sure. IIO'llœ THAT TD sun UQUUT OP TO ZOIIIm AJIIDIISTlAtOR A WII'l'TD O.UI08 AS to WHY 'limB WAS 110 VAIUIICB ···--D POR SID· PLAJI m. 16-" IIICBABL AD IIA.D'IIA HOGAII. COBClDIJIQ OftRCOIISTI.UCTIOB OP A mBCOlØODIIIC USE, Introduced by Nicholaø Caimano who moved for ite adoption, seconded by James Martin: Duly adopted thie 16th day of October, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Hr. Cafœano, Hr. Hartin, Mre. Pulver, Mr. LaPointe, Mr. Cartier NOES: NONE ABSENt. Mr. Hagan, Hr. Kupillas HR. eAlatER-Could you aek Staff to draft that letter? Stu, would you be willing to handle that? HR. BAKER-Certainly. HR. eAlalER-thank you. 4 "~ 1)" - - -- TOWN OF QUEENSBURY P'lJllnn;ng Department WNOTE TO FILEw Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Date: December 10. 1990 Lee A. York By: X Area Variøce - Use Variance - Sip Variance := Interpretation Other: SubclØisioø: Sketch, _ PrelimiDary, Site Plan Review - == Petition far a Change of Zone Freshwater WetJaDds Permit FiDal Application Number: Area VariancE'! No. Q4-1QQO Applicant's Name: Howam M. Tnnmpy Meeting Date: December 19, 1990 ............................................................................................ The request is to construct a deck on an existing steel and concrete platform adjacent to Lake Sunnyside. I want to make the Board aware that this applicant has applied to get permission to utilize this site in the past. The request was to construct a single family residential building on the site of the old pavilion. The Warren County DPW and Planning Board were very concerned about this because of traffic safety issues. (letters attached). The Board may want to keep this in mind while you review this site. The applicant should also be aware that the . Zoning Administrator has determined that a Site Plan Review will be required if this variance is granted. I reviewed this Petition with regard to Section 10.040. 1. Are there special conditions applying to this property and not generally applying to others in the neighborhood? Yes. This property has an existing steel and cement structure which is unique to the site. z. Would the .strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance deprive the applicant of reasonable use of the property? Yes. The applicant currently does not have use of the area other than as a boat launching area which is used by the general public. 3. Would the strict application of the dimensional requirements result in a specified practical difficulty. Yes. The applicant cannot use the property because of its size and shape. It is bounded on the west by Lake Sunnyside and on the east by Sunnyside Road. There is no way to move the existing structure and to build a dwelling unit is prohibited because of the safety issues. -~------- A V94-1990 -- -../ .. 4. Would the variance be materially detrimental to the purposes of this Ordinance or to the property in the district? No, the request is to build a deck on an existing substructure. The Board should be assured that the sides of this platform will not inhibit the view and visibility of the lake. Also, that pressure treated lumber will not be used below the water level. 5. Is the request the minimum relief necessary to relieve the practical difficulty? Yes. The applicant will have use of the existing structure as access to the lake without creating a detrimental influence in the neighborhood. LA Y /sed ..~---_.,_..._-- WAR"'" CoUNTY OKPARTMIENT 0... PUElUC WO~K. W,......,...OPPICØ' '-' .......,. r ............. MUNICIPAL CENTER OPFICa W....'....N.Y.1.. Llk.George, N.Y. 12141 T...I1.......,., 51..711.... Su,...nt...dlnt'. 0ttI0e H......., ØMeIaft PIrka IIId ........... Alrpoft AcIInInIItrItIa Equipment .......... EngIMIrInI Hltchery AdmInI.t"'" Civil D.f.n.. and N.tural DI...ter Tet. 51..7.1-1410 Building. Ind Ground. Tet. 51..7.,.... County Enervy OHlce Tet. 51..7.1..... FRED AUSTIN, P.E. Supt. Public Work. ROGER GEBO PETER BROWN Dept. SUptl., Public WOrkl WARREN COUNTY AIRPORT County Lln. Road Glenl FIlii, N.Y. 12801 T.I. 51.712·5111 January 25. 1988 Ms. Sue Goetz "-zA>,.,JI/\J"&- Queensbury i18RRi~ Board Queensbury Town Hall Bay & Haviland Rd. Glens Falls. NY 12801 RE: CR 54, Sunnyside Rd. Old Sunnyside Pavilion Dear Ms. Goetz: Pursuant to our conversation. this office and the County Planning Board have reservations about allowing reconstruction on the old pavilion foundation. proximity to the edge of the pavement poses a potential traffic ty hazard and snow removal procedures and storage will be compromised. ours. ? t,j Fr ~ Wãrren Co. Superintendent Dept. of Public Works FA: lb cc: Dan Kane. Warren Co. Planning Dept. ..~.._--,_._-,.- , ",..- . - -- .....,;' FIt E (C:"J~ TOWN OF QUEENSBURY ptanning Department -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: December 10. 1990 John Goralski By: x Area VariaDc:e U.. Variaace == Sip VariaDce _ IDt~JAetatiGD SubclÏYÏsioa: Sketch, Site Plan Rerie.., - == Petition for a CbaDge of Zone Freshwater WetlaDda Permit Pl'elimiDary. FiDal Other: AppticatiOD Number: Area Variance No. 95-1990 Appticant's Name: Karen J. Witte Meeting Date: December 19, ] 990 ............................................................................................ The parcel in quest ion is actually 1.79 acres. The applicant wishes to purchase 15,300 sq. ft. from the owner. In order to receive subdivision approval the applicant must show that the resultant lot is usable. Because of the presence of Old Maid's Brook and the 75 foot setback requirement from Bay Road, there could not be any new construction on this property. Other property owners in the neighborhood have the right to subdivide their property into 5,000 sq. ft. lots. Because of the unique circumstances on this lot, this property owner does not enjoy that same right. LAY/pw ._~--~.- . - - ..-' , TOWN OF QUEENSBURY Planning Department -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner By: December 10, 1990 Lee A. York Date: x Area VariaDce Uøe Variance == Sip Variance _ IDterpretatioa Other: Subdi.uïon: Sketch, Site Plan Review - - Petition for a CbaDge -of Zone Freshwater Wet1aDda Permit PreJimiDary, Final Applicatioa Number: Area Variance No. 96-1990 AppUcant's Name: c. R. Bard Meeting Date: December J 9. J 990 ............................................................................................ The request is for a setback variance from a Delaware and Hudson Railroad line. The property is Light Industrial and the storage shed to be expanded meets all other requirements of the Ordinance as determined by the Zoning Administrator. I reviewed this submission with regard to Section 10.040: Are there special circumstances applying to this property or building and not applying to other properties in the area. Yes. The property is a light industrial use and zone surrounded by residential and highway commercial zones. Would the strict application of the Ordinance deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of the land or buildings. No, the applicant has reasonable use of the building and site. The application :states that the answer to this question is yes. The Board may wish to further question him on this issue. Would the strict application of the dimensional requirements result in a specified practical difficulty. The applicant could put the addition on the back of the shed which would not require any variances. The reality of the situation is that the building has a small area that is already four feet from the D & H Railway. The plans indicate the app 1 icant wants to add an area 28~' x 7' adjacent to this area and "fill in" to the end of the building. The applicant should address his "yes" answer to this question with the Board. _._-,_._--~---._- ,. - --' Area Variance 96-1990 c. R. Bard Would tbe variance be materially detrimental to tbe purposes of tbis ordinance. No. Is tbe request minimal re lie f . Since the applicant has not spelled out the practical difficulty, the Board will have to discuss his answer to this question with him. LAY/pw -2- .,...------.--.. . - ~ --/ 1 TOWN OF QUEENSBURY PI:lnning Department -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: December 7, 1990 Lee A. York By: x Area VariaDc:e Use Variance - Sip Variance := IDterpretatioa Subdi'risioa: Sketch, _ PreJimiDary, Site Plan Rmew - := Petition f(]l" a CbaDge of Zone Freshwater WetlaDda Permit FiDal Other: Application Number: Area Variance 88-1990 Applicant'. Name: Timothy Barber - For Dick and Sue Rourke MeetiDg Date: December 19, 1990 *.............................****.......................................................... A new plan has been submitted which indicates the need for 3 variances. One for the setbacks required in the zone, one for the shoreline setback and one for proposing an enlargement wh ich wi 11 exceed 50% of the original gross floor area of the original structure. The application indicates that the órigina1 structure will be removed. The application states that the unit currently contains 1,224 square feet of living space. The request is to increase the living space to 2,872 square feet. This is an increase of 1,648 square feet. The property is on .31 acres in a critical environmental area. The Rourke's must meet the tests for an Area Variance. These are: Are there special conditions applying to this property or building, and not applying to others in the neighborhood? The other lots in the neighborhood are similar in nature. camps which have been upgraded. The topography of this substantially different than those surrounding it. The lots hold lot is not Would the strict application of this Ordinance deprive the applicant of reasonable use of the property? The property was transferred on May 30, 1990. The residence has always been a camp, and the applicant currently has a reasonable use of it. Modi ficat ions can be made to the structure to bring it up to code with no Variances. -1- ________n__.__ '- ....../ Area Variance 88-1990 Timothy Barber Would the strict application of the dimensional requirements result in a specified practical difficulty? No. The applicant has no practical difficulty. He has the ability to upgrade his camp. His desire to more than double the capacity of the structure is not a practical difficulty created by the Ordinance. Would the Variance be materially detrimental to the Ordinance or to property in the district? 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 land, and continued expansion detrimental to the purposes of district. were based on the carrying capacity of the of use and area on sensitive lands is the Ordinance and to the property in the Is the request the minimal 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. This option would not create more impermeable area, it would not increase the nonconformity of the lot or building and it would give the owner additional living space. LAY/pw