1991-04-24
---
~EENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SECOND REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 24TH, 1991
INDEX
Area Variance No. 25-1991 Dr. Joseph & Rose Guerra 1.
Area Variance No. 28-1991 Joan M. Lee 5.
Area Variance No. 29-1991 Barbara Cherry 8.
Use Variance No. 30-1991 James Betit 12.
Pau1 Scarincio
Area Variance No. 33-1991 Edward Humburg 19.
THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL
APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES.
QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SECOND REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 24TH, 1991
7:30 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT
THEODORE TURNER, CHAIRMAN
SUSAN GOETZ, SECRETARY
JOYCE EGGLESTON
BRUCE CARR
JEFFREY KELLEY
CHARLES SICARD
MEMBERS ABSENT
MICHAEL SHEA
DEPUTY TOlIN ATTORNEY-KARLA CORPUS
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR-PAT CRAYFORD
SENIOR PLANNER-LEE A. YORK
STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI
NEW BUSINESS:
AREA VARIANCE NO. 25-1991 TYPE II WR-lA DR. JOSEPH I ROSE GUERRA OWNER: J & R GUERRA, A I S
CAMPRIELLO SEELYE ROAD, CLEVERDALE TO EXPAND 1110 VERY SMALL BEDROOMS WITH AN 18 FT. BY 28 FT. ADDITION.
ADDITION WILL NOT MEET SIDE YARD SETBACK. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 16-1-32 LOT SIZE:
26,000 SQ. FT. SECTION 4.020 D
JOE ROULIER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Lee A. York, Senior P1anner, Area Variance No. 25-1991, Dr. Joseph & Rose Guerra, March
15, 1991, Meeting Date: Apri1 27, 1~91 "The variance request is to modify the sideyard setbacks of
a sum of 50 feet and a minimum of 20 feet in a Waterfront Residentia1 zone. The app1icant wants to
expand two bedrooms and add a bath and a new foyer to the rear of the existing residence. The setback
wou1d be 18 feet from the adjacent property 1ine. In reviewing this app1ication, a coup1e of concerns
came to 1ight. First, I sca1ed the map presented. The measurements are inconsistent. The sca1e is
1 inch equa1s 25 feet, 3/4 of an inch equa1s 24 feet. On the proposed addition, s1ight1y more than
3/4 of an inch is 1abe1ed 28 feet. I have to question the accuracy of the p1an and the actua1 size
of the proposed addition. This can be particu1ar1y important because of the permeab11ity requirement.
The residence, shed, garage, parking area, and driveway are impermeab1e areas. It is not possib1e
to determine if there is 60 percent permeab1e area on the site without accurate measurements. The
permeab11ity issue is particu1ar1y important a10ng 1akeshores and critica1 environmenta1 areas. The
continued expansion of nonconforming structures have cumu1ative impacts which 1ead to the deterioration
of these natura1 resources. The 10t adjacent to the app1icants (Joseph and Rose Guerra) is owned by
Rose Guerra. In 1985 the Board reviewed a site p1an for this property. The Board indicated that there
was an a1ternative for the app1icant, in that the two 10ts cou1d be joined and the need for a variance
cou1d be e1iminated (notes attached). I reviewed this app1ication with regard to the Area Variance
criteria. 1. Are there specia1 conditions app1ying to this property or bu11ding. and not app1ying
generaHy to other properties or bu11dings in the neighborhood? No. The 10t is simi1ar in nature
to those in the neighborhood. 2. Wou1d strict app1ication of the provisions of this Ordinance deprive
the app1icant of the reasonab1e use of the 1and or bu11dings? No. The app1icant current1y has
reasonab1e use of the property. 3. Wou1d the strict app1ication of the dimensiona1 requirements resu1t
in a specified practica1 difficuHy? The app1icant current1y has a structure with 2,280 sq. ft. of
1iving space. The desire to expand a structure is not considered a practica1 difficuHy. 4. Wou1d
this variance be materiaHy detrimenta1 to the purposes of this Ordinance, or to property in the
district? The reduction in permeab1e area in this area is detrimenta1 to the purposes of the Ordinance
which is to protect the 1akeshore areas. 5. Is this request the minimum re1ief necessary to a11eviate
the specified practica1 difficu1ty? There is no identified practica1 difficu1ty. Perhaps the app1icant
cou1d achieve the desired resuHs through interior renovations."
MRS. GOETZ-The Warren County P1anning Board just said "No County Impact".
MR. TURNER-Mr. Rou1ier.
MR. ROULIER-Good evening. I'm Joe Rou1ier and I 'H represent Dr. Guerra and answer any questions that
you might have.
1
--
MR. TURNER-I guess you've heard the comments from Staff. You have them right there in front of you.
MR. ROULIER-Okay. I would li ke to back track one step, in regard to a proposal, in 1985. The proposal
was to put a six foot addition on tile south side of the house which would encroach further upon the
property line. The Guerras do own the adjacent parcel of property and at that time we felt as though,
because they did own the property, that there wouldn't be a problem of obtaining the variance, but
the Board subsequently denied the request and as an alternative indicated that if we would combine
the two properties into one property, then we could go ahead and simply put the addition onto the
property, but it creates a problem for the Guerras in that they own two expensive pieces of property
on Lake George and they do have one family member. and this is only supposition, but if they ever wanted
to give a piece of property to their daughter, it would preclude them from doing that. If they ever
wanted to sell that adjoining piece of property in the future, because of financial circumstances or
whatever, then the alternative that was offered would also preclude them from doing that. So, although
the Board did present an alternative to us, it certainly isn't a practical alternative. The proposed
addition that we're currently proposing does not encroach any further on the 75 foot limit to Lake
George and we felt as though this would be the least amount of encroachment on the side line properties
and by going back and therefore it would create no problems in obtaining the area variance. Because
the building is somewhat skewed on the property, it does encroach to the property line by approximately,
I think it's three more feet, but it seems like, you know, the practical difficulty is that with all
the new Ordinances and all that are in place, it creates problems for people to be able to do with
their property what they would like to do, for example, enlarge two bedrooms. What we're proposing
to do, really. is the least we can ask for and still accomplish what we want to, in terms of expansion
of that area.
MR. TURNER-What's the layout of the single family residence that's there? Is that a story and a half?
MR. ROULIER-No.
MR. TURNER-It sits on a little grade, there. You can't see the front.
MR. ROULIER-You were up there?
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. ROULIER-Okay. The area that goes across the front is a play room area that's backed up by a
storagelbasement area where the pumps are and all the utilities of the house. It's a relatively small
area. Upstairs is a large wrap around porch that goes from the south side to the north and then a
portion of the north side back to the west. The balance of the house is predominately a living room,
dining room, and kitchen and then in the rear of the house there are two very, very small bedrooms.
They're in the area of, maybe, seven by seven, and then on the south side of the house, there's two
additional bedrooms that are also small, and they were the ones, initially, that we wanted to expand,
back in 1985. Now, I don't know if there's been any comments from the neighbors, although I did read
one letter from the neighbor to the north that would be most effected by the approval of this variance
and I don't think that there was any opposition offered.
MRS. GOETZ-Did you take care of the scaling problems?
MR. ROULIER-No. This is the first that this has been brought to my attention, okay, and without really
getting a licensed engineer in there to prepare these, it's very difficult to have it down to the exact
measurement. There is a grade to the property and without transits available to us, it's difficult.
MR. SICARD-How close are those two buildings, Joe, the two separate buildings?
MR. ROULIER-To the south side? I believe they're about 23 feet from building to building.
MR. SICARD-About 23 feet.
MR. TURNER-Joe, on the plan, here, there's another shed right here. It doesn't show it on this drawing
at all. There's another shed right in here. It's not there.
MR. ROULIER-A little utility shed.
MR. TURNER- Yes.
MR. ROULIER-Yes, that's right. There is. There's a little gazebo there. too.
MR. TURNER-Is the utility shed about 100 square feet or something like that?
MR. ROULIER-Substantially less than that.
MR. TURNER-Less than that?
MR. ROULIER-I think it's in the area of about 42 square feet.
2
--
MR. TURNER-Forty two square feet.
MR. ROULIER-Six by seven.
MR. TURNER-Okay. I'd ask you, why cou1dn't you go up with this, instead of coming back? Why cou1dn't
you put another addition on top, put another f100r? That property's got a 10t of bui1dings on it for
that piece of property that it is.
MR. ROULIER- To be perfect1y honest wi th you, Mr. Turner, it wasn't proposed, that was not proposed
to me by the Guerras. They came to me and they said that they wanted to go out the back portion of
the house with two bedrooms and a bathroom. That has not been something that has been considered.
MR. TURNER-They haven't considered it because they don't want it that way?
MR. ROULIER-WeH, for one thing, from the properties a10ng the back of the road, it wou1d significant1y
reduce the view to the 1ake, which wou1d be a consideration.
MR. TURNER-You can't see much of the 1ake from there anyway because there's a hedge right here in the
front. You can't see the 1ake at a11.
MR. ROULIER-WeH, the houses that are on the back are aH much higher than the road and 100k right
down on it, right across the back there.
MR. TURNER-You mean the ones across the road?
MR. ROULIER-That's right.
MR. TURNER-We11. they won't expect to see the 1ake that far away anyway. You don't 1ive up there that
far away from the 1ake just to see the 1ake.
MR. ROULIER-Aside from that, it wou1d create some structura1 prob1ems, in that. the entire interior
portion of the house wou1d have to be comp1ete1y redesigned and rebu11t to support that. I mean. the
entire house wou1d have to be rebui1t. So, economica11y, it wou1d present a financia1 hardship.
MR. TURNER-I'11 te11 you, I went up and 100ked at it and it is rea1 crowded. There's a 10t of bui1ding
on that 1itt1e strip of 1and, b1acktop.
MR. ROULIER-Yes.
MRS. EGGLESTON-How many members of the househ01d are there?
MR. ROULIER-There are four members of the househ01d.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Grown chi1dren, or what is the?
MR. ROULIER- There are, weH, two adu1ts, Dr. and Mrs. Guerra. They have a daughter, approximate1y
20 years 01d and her father 1ives with them, Mr. Camprie110, and he's approximate1y 70.
MRS. EGGLESTON-And they have four bedrooms now, even though their sma11.
MR. ROULIER-Yes, they are very, very sma11 bedrooms.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Maybe combine one. Any thoughts of making a 1arge, making at 1east so you'd have one
1arge, two of the sma11 ones that are right together?
MR. ROULIER-WeH, this had been proposed back in 1985, with the expansion of the two bedrooms to the
south. The bedrooms are so smaH. There's no c10sets in the house at aH and with the proposa1 that
we had in 1985, it was to expand the house six feet a10ng the south side and by doing that, aHowing
bedrooms for them in that area. To be perfect1y honest with you, this seemed 11ke this addition wou1d
create the 1east prob1ems for the house, for the neighbors, and from a financia1 standpoint wou1d
certain1y be the most economica1 way to go. I can't deny that what Mr. Turner says about it's increasing
the amount of bu11ding on the property. If we're concerned about the permeab11ity, maybe there cou1d
be some reduction in the driveway area. Maybe some bui1dings, for examp1e the uti1ity shed that you're
referring to cou1d be e1iminated from the property.
MR. TURNER-Yes. You've got a ut11ity shed in front of the storage shed. That storage shed is 21 and
a ha1f feet 10ng by 12 feet wide.
MR. ROULIER-Yes.
MR. TURNER-Then you've got a two car garage behind that and you've got b1acktop between that and that.
3
MR. ROULIER-That's right.
MR. TURNER-Within 10 feet of the line. The roof line. you'll maintain the same roof line with the
addition that's there now, on the back?
MR. ROULIER-It would be an L-shaped roof line coming across the front as it is and then turning and
coming back with a gable off the back portion of the new addition. Another thing that helps keep a
low profile is a portion of the ground, to keep the floor level from the house in through the new
addition, it would be somewhat excavated in the back. So the house, as it comes back toward the hill,
is actually being built down into the hill. So you're not going to have the structure coming up into
the air.
MR. TURNER-Yes. The back of the house is already dug into the hill.
MR. ROULIER-That's correct, yes.
MR. KELLEY-Joe, what do they use the house to the south for if there's only four people to start with?
MR. ROULIER-Okay. They're currently using that as a rental unit, Mr. Kelley.
MR. KELLEY-So there's nobody in that family, then, that's living in it. They rent it out or whatever?
MR. ROULIER-That's correct.
MR. KELLEY-Are you concerned about the permeability?
MRS. GOETZ-Yes.
MR. KELLEY-I mean, think Lee's point is probably well made.
MRS. GOETZ-It seems if they're not willing to combine the two lots. that they are going to have to
make other adjustments to get more permeability. You're suggestion was good, about taking out some
of the driveway. There appear to be some things they could do, if they really want the bedrooms.
I think they're just going to have to weigh storage shed and driveway versus living space.
MR. ROULIER-I agree with you. I wouldn't be defensive about that because that's the requirement in
the Town of Queensbury ri ght now and I know that a good porti on of thi s and other areas around the
lake. driveway areas have created the problem.
MR. TURNER-Joe, what's the measurement on the addition right here, in depth? I can't read it on here.
MR. ROULIER-Eighteen feet.
MR. TURNER-Eighteen.
MR. KELLEY-Do you want some square footages, Ted?
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. KELLEY-I've got them.
MR. TURNER-I couldn't read it on mine. What have you got?
MR. KELLEY-Well, for the three buildings, I come up with around 3,762, and you said there's another
building that's not on here.
MR. ROULIER-The utility.
MR. TURNER-Yes. that's 42 square feet more.
MR. KELLEY-That's 3804. It probably could be in questi on, though. whether the permeability thing,
because I just took the long length of the lot, the 344, okay, and I called it 73 in the back and 83
in the front. That made it, like. 78. So, 78 times 344, that was 26.842 and then I didn't realized
that it's only 316 on the other side, but using the long dimension is was 26,832 square feet. Sixty
percent of that is 16,000, which would mean you could have up to somewhere between 9 and 10,000 square
feet of buildings and driveways, while we're at 3804 with just buildings and there's a lot of driveway
there. I would think some more accurate dimensions of driveway space might be needed before we can
even know that we've got a problem or not. I mean. you may not have one and that would be to your
benefi t.
MR. ROULIER-Okay.
4
-
MR. KELLEY-We're saying, if there is, we wou1d want to know that. so we cou1d render some kind of a
decision. We don't want to just bypass it. We can't do that, rea11y.
MR. ROULIER-Because of the 60 percent ru1e.
MR. TURNER- Yes.
MR. ROULIER-I understand that. Okay. I think that the Guerras, though. wou1d be agreeab1e to some
type of aHeration so that we wou1d come within that 60 percent. If that's the ru1e, that's the ru1e.
MR. CARR-I think we're going to have to see what that agreement is, or what that proposa1 is. I think
Jeff's point is weH taken. It's so c10se right now, we can't say, wen, bring it down. because we
don't know how much you've got to bring it down. No one does.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. ROULIER-Yes. Okay. Then what I wou1d do is I wou1d propose that this be tab1ed tonight and I
wou1d supp1y the Board with the best estimate of the permeabHity that I cou1d come up with for the
review of Staff.
MR. TURNER-AH right, and then maybe you cou1d discuss some of the other issues that are raised. here,
in re1ation to that addition. Maybe there's some thought to maybe going up. Maybe there isn't.
Lets see what they've got to say.
MR. ROULIER-Yes. Okay. I'll go over that with them, other comments on it.
MR. KELLEY-WeH, if you're going to go do it, you might as weB get it more to sca1e. answer Lee's
question about that, too.
MR. TURNER- Yes.
MR. ROULIER-Yes, we11, we'11 redo it. Yes, that won't be an issue.
MR. TURNER-I don't think we ought to go to the pub11c hearing. Lets tab1e it at this point and 1et
him bring back a new p1an and then if there's any comment.
MOTION TO TABLE AREA VARIANCE NO. 25-1991 DR. JOSEPH I ROSE GUERRA, Introduced by Theodore Turner
who moved for its adoption, seconded by Susan Goetz:
Tab1ed at the app11cant's request to provide the Board with additiona1 information as to permeabi11ty
and new sca1e, property re-sca1ed with the right measurements and any other necessary information that
app1ies to the app1ication.
Du1y adopted this 24th day of Apri1, 1991, by the f0110wing vote:
AYES: Mr. Ke11ey. Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Egg1eston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Shea
MR. ROULIER-Okay. Thank you very much.
MR. TURNER-Thank you, Joe.
AREA VARIANCE NO. 28-1991 TYPE II SR-lA JOAN M. LEE OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE CORNER OF SHERMAN AVENUE
AND LEO STREET TO ENLARGE HOME BY ADDING ONE BEDROOM. ADDITION WILL NOT MEET FRONT OR REAR SETBACKS.
TAX MAP NO. 120-1-50 LOT SIZE: 7,073.55 SQ. FT. SECTION 4.020 G, FRONT AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
JEFF LEE. PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from John Gora1ski, P1anner, Area Variance No. 28-1991. Joan Lee. AprH 16. 1991, Meeting Date:
AprH 24. 1991 "The app11cant current1y has reasonab1e use of the property and the strict app11cation
of the Ordinance wou1d not deny this use. In reviewing this app1ication the Board shou1d consider
that this proposa1 wiH have no impact on pub11c facHities and services and wiH not change the
character of the neighborhood. The variation is substantia1 in re1ation to the rear yard setback
requirement. The addition is one foot c10ser to the rear property 11ne than the existing house.
However, the existing buHding 11ne wiH be maintained in the front and rear of the house. It is on1y
because of the ang1e of the existing house that the addition is c10ser to the property 11ne."
5
-
MR. TURNER-I have a question as to the addition. It's going to be just the bedroom?
MR. LEE-Yes. Well. the entrance will be in that, too.
MR. TURNER-Right. Yes. It's going up the same height as the house is now, right?
MR. LEE- Yes.
MR. TURNER-Just straight out. the same roof pitch and everything?
MR. LEE-The same roof line and same walls, yes.
MR. TURNER-Is there any future, here, for a garage some place?
MR. LEE-Probably not because there's probably not room.
MR. TURNER-You've only got about 18.8 between the addition and the proposed addition and your shed,
right?
MR. LEE- Yes.
MR. TURNER-Because I noticed there, when I looked at it, you know. where you had parked the truck,
that was my thought, maybe that later on you mi ght propose to put a garage on and attach it. but it's
a pretty small lot.
MR. LEE-Basically, where I park my truck and car is where the addition is going.
MR. TURNER-Right.
MR. LEE-And that's where I would move the driveway.
MR. TURNER-You'd have it north.
MR. LEE-Yes. I'd have to move it to be where my truck was.
MR. TURNER- Yes.
MR. LEE-And, really, the shed is right there. If you put a garage there, that would be right in front
of it, so it really wouldn't look right.
MR. TURNER-No. Does anyone else have any questions? This was, I think, you know, look at the lot.
50 feet wide. It's got a lot of depth. I think back down the road it was, like, UR-lO. That's why
it was zoned that way. How long have you owned the house?
MR. LEE-Four years.
MR. TURNER-Four years?
MR. LEE-Yes.
MR. KELLEY-My question would have been about the bedrooms, but it answered it. that there were only
two.
MRS. LEE-And we don't have a cellar either. We'd put bedrooms down there.
MR. KELLEY-There's no cellar?
MR. TURNER-No cellar.
MR. LEE-No cellar, just a crawl space.
MR. KELLEY-Well, the basic square footage of the existing house is 968 square feet. I mean, it's not
a big house to start with.
MR. TURNER-No.
MR. KELLEY-I mean, you can understand, if you've got four people living there and the kids want their
own room.
MR. TURNER- Yes.
MR. KELLEY-Which would be understandable.
6
-
MR. TURNER-Right.
MR. KELLEY-I guess the other difficulty he has really two fronts.
MR. TURNER-He's got two fronts and the rear, that's it.
MR. KELLEY-The only thing I thought about when I looked at it was that maybe there would be a way to
jog it somehow, but then you're into change of roof lines. I mean, you aren't going to gain that much.
MR. TURNER-No.
MR. KELLEY-To go through all the hassle of doing it.
MR. TURNER-No. You're only talking a 12 foot addition. You don't want to change the angle from 12
feet.
MR. KELLEY-Right. I guess the only other thing would be, you talked about the garage and, I don't
know, Jeff, do you think you're going to stay here a while and you're going to want a garage someday?
MR. LEE-Well, a garage is not a problem with me. I mean. I can live without a garage.
MR. KELLEY-Well. I guess my thought being, it would be possible. you could possibly do a garage and
have a room over it.
MR. TURNER-Have a room over it, that's what I was thinking of.
MR. KELLEY-You know, so you'd end up having garage capability and still get a bedroom, and yet you
wouldn't be using up more ground space, so to speak.
MR. LEE-Yes. Well, I don't really need the garage that bad, so.
MR. TURNER-Okay.
MR. KELLEY-I'm just trying to think of you in the future.
MR. TURNER-Yes, down the road.
MR. LEE-Yes.
MR. KELLEY-If you could come up with something now and say, gee. I could address both.
MR. LEE-Well, that's a good idea, but also, too, I'm trying to keep the amount of money down.
MR. TURNER-All right. No further comments? I'll open the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. TURNER-Motion's in order.
MRS. GOETZ-Is it 15 feet on the back?
MR. TURNER-No, it's 20 on the back. Thirty feet on the two fronts.
MRS. GOETZ-But the relief is?
MR. TURNER-The relief is seven feet on the front and fifteen.
MRS. GOETZ-It's 6.4 on the front, isn't it?
MR. TURNER-It's 23 for the addition.
MRS. GOETZ-23.6, isn't it?
MR. TURNER-I don't know. Is that 23 feet 6 inches?
MR. LEE-Yes. It's 23 feet 6 inches.
MR. TURNER-Okay.
7
.,./
MRS. GOETZ-So. 6.4 re1ief on the front?
MR. TURNER-6 feet 6 inches.
MRS. GOETZ-And on the back it's 15 feet re1ief, I thought it was, because isn't that 5?
MR. TURNER-Yes, 5 and 15.
MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 28-1991 JOAN M. LEE, Introduced by Jeffrey KeHey who moved for
its adoption, seconded by Theodore Turner:
I fee1 the practica1 difficuHy is the existing 10t size which is shown on a map to be 50 feet by 142
feet. The 142 feet being on the west property Hne. On the east property Hne it wou1d be 141.82
feet. There is no additiona1 property avaHab1e for purchase which might have been on way of easing
the practica1 difficuHy. This particu1ar 10t is a corner 10t which fronts on Sherman Avenue and Leo
Street. The existing house has 968 square feet of 1iving space and is considered sma11 for four fami1y
members. The proposed addition appears to be a reasonab1e request. The variances necessary to a11eviate
the practica1 difficuHy are as f0110ws: From Leo Street, or the west property 1ine, the requirement
is a 30 foot setback. The proposed addition wiH be 23 feet six inches. The variance therefore is
six feet six inches. The second variance necessary is for a rear yard setback, the Ordinance ca11ing
for 20 feet. The new addition wou1d be 10cated five feet from this easter1y property 1ine. Therefore,
the variance wou1d be 15 feet. There's no adverse effect on pub1ic faci1ities. There's no neighborhood
opposition and these things appear to be the minimum variance needed to a11eviate the practica1
difficu1ty.
Du1y adopted this 24th day of Apri1, 1991, by the f0110wing vote:
AYES: Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Egg1eston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Ke11ey, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Shea
AREA VARIANCE NO. 29-1991 TYPE: UNLISTED SR-lA BARBARA CHERRY OWNER: SAlE AS ABOVE UP BURCH
ROAD, 3RD HOUSE PAST WARREN LANE IN BACK OF BROlIN HOUSE AND YELLOW RANCH TO REJlJVE OLD UNUSABLE MOBILE
HOME AND REPlACE IT WITH NEIlLY CONSTRUCTED RANCH. APPLICANT lIAS 30 FT. ROAD FRONTAGE IN LIEU OF THE
REQUIRED 40 FT. TAX MAP NO. 121-6-11 LOT SIZE: 0.6 ACRES SECTION 7.077 FRONTAGE 011 A PUBLIC STREET
BARBARA CHERRY, PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Lee A. York, Senior P1anner, Area Variance No. 29-1991, Barbara Cherry. AprH 19. 1991,
Meeting Date: AprH 24, 1991 "The request is to p1ace a house on a 10t which does not meet the
requirement for 40 feet on a Town road. The 10t has 30 feet on Burch Road. The app1icant has recent1y
removed a mobHe home from the 10t. The 10t is ± 1/3 of an acre with the dri veway extending 225 feet
in from the road. The rationa1 for having a specified amount of road frontage is for emergency access.
The app1i cant's property abuts AprH Lane to the east. AprH Lane is a private road but cou1d provi de
emergency access if such was needed. This appHcation was reviewed with regard to Section 10.040.
The requirements for granting an Area Variance are as f0110ws: 1. Are there specia1 conditions app1ying
to this property or buHding, and not app1ying generaHy to other properties or buHdings in the
neighborhood? The app1icant's 10t is a f1ag 10t having the driveway with the frontage and the
deve10pab1e area in the back. The 10t is rather unique in shape. The east side of the property is
on a private road. The 10t preexisted the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Wou1d strict appHcation of the
provisions of this Ordinance deprive the appHcant of the reasonab1e use of the 1and or buHdings?
Yes. The app1icant is in a sing1e famHy zone and wou1d be prohibited from putting a dweHing unit
on the 10t. The 10t has been utHized for dweHing purposes for some time. 3. Wou1d the strict
app1ication of the dimensiona1 requirements resuH in a specified practica1 difficuHy? Yes. The
app1icant has removed their mobi1e home and needs to rep1ace it. 4. Wou1d this variance be materia11y
detrimenta1 to the purposes of this Ordinance, or to property in the district? The appHcant has 30
feet on the Town road rather than 40. The 10t has been used for a number of years and its continued
use wou1d not be detrimenta1 to the neighborhood. 5. Is this request the minimum re1ief necessary
to aHeviate the specified practica1 difficuHy? Yes."
MR. CARR-Ms. Cherry, on the map, here, this is the 10t we're ta1king about?
MS. CHERRY-Yes.
MR. CARR-Okay. Who owns this other f1ag 10t?
MS. CHERRY-We do, together.
8
MR. CARR-Okay. We11, the deed reference says to you. It says here, Patricia LeC1air to Barbara Cherry?
MS. CHERRY-Yes. I bought that. There was the trai1er on it a1ready and there was a right-of-way through
our property to the traHer and when I bought that 10t, I made the permanent right-of-way or changed
the way everything was.
MR. CARR-Okay. So, we11, I guess this front 10t, the one that's c10ser to Burch, who owns that.
MS. CHERRY-Both of us, yes.
MR. CARR-You both own it by deed?
MS. CHERRY-Yes. Both of us. We bui1t a house on that 10t.
MR. TURNER-That's the new house that's there, the ye110w house?
MS. CHERRY-Yes.
MRS. GOETZ-But you're going to 1ive in the one that you hope to put up?
MS. CHERRY-No. We 1ive in the front one. The one that we put in the back we 'n rent. We rented the
trai1er out before.
MR. CARR-Okay. So you're 1iving, right now, about 140, 150 feet off the road, or cou1d you show me?
MS. CHERRY-Yes. I'm 1iving in the front 10t, the very. very front 10t, here. This one, right here.
MR. CARR-Okay. This is owned by who?
MS. CHERRY-By the Cherrys. I own this one. This is Barbara Cherry and John Waring.
MR. CARR-This midd1e one?
MS. CHERRY-Yes.
MR. CARR-A11 right.
MR. KELLEY-So, do I have it right? You're two properties are separated by?
MS. CHERRY-The one we own together.
MR. TURNER-Yes. They 1ive in the 10t with the house in front on Burch Road. Is that correct?
MS. CHERRY-Yes.
MR. KELLEY-Yes, 20,288 square feet. That's where they 1ive.
MR. TURNER-You rent the next 10t.
MS. CHERRY-Yes.
MR. KELLEY-20.100.
MR. TURNER-And you want to put a house on the next 10t and rent that.
MS. CHERRY-Bui1d another ranch just 1ike the ye110w one down on the next one.
MR. KELLEY-Okay. So they own them a11.
MR. TURNER-They own everything.
MR. KELLEY-Okay and they want to bui1d one and rent one back here.
MR. TURNER-They bought the midd1e one in '83. They bought the back 10t in '87.
MS. CHERRY-It was a11 one 10t at one time.
MR. TURNER-You divided?
MS. CHERRY-Yes. We divided it into two 10ts. The two that have houses right now used to be an one
10t. That was before you made it an acre.
9
MR. TURNER-Yes. Right. That was SR-20, I think. That was SR-20 then, Jeff, when they divided it.
Except for this one back here. They divided it.
MR. KELLEY-I was doing well until I found out they didn't live in it. That's a whole different picture,
you know.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes.
MR. CARR-What's that?
MRS. EGGLESTON-Because she doesn't live in it, that it's going to be for rental purposes.
MR. CARR-It's a preexisting lot of record. I mean, I was asking about the merger rules, but it's
checkerboard, so we can't merge the two properties, and it's a preexisting lot of record. I think
it's just a technicality that they're here because of, what is it, 280A of the Town Law or something?
MR. TURNER- Yes.
MS. CORPUS-No. It complies with 280A. It has sufficient road frontage, but it doesn't meet the 40
foot requirement in our Zoning Ordinance.
MR. TURNER-It doesn't meet the 40 because back in '82 it was 30.
MR. CARR-But then why is it not a preexisting nonconforming?
MS. CORPUS-It is.
MR. CARR-So why is this here?
MRS. CRAYFORD-It's just that I can't give a building permit unless a lot have 40 foot frontage.
MR. CARR-Even preexisting lots of record?
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MS. CORPUS-The nonconforming section deals with structures and uses.
MR. TURNER-Yes. That's why it's here.
MRS. CRAYFORD-I wouldn't have brought him in just for the heck of it.
MR. CARR-Yes, I know. We've seen these before.
MR. KELLEY-The, what was that, April Lane is it, the one in the back?
MR. TURNER-Yes, in the back.
MS. CHERRY-Yes.
MR. KELLEY-Who owns that?
MS. CHERRY-Converse. The family owns it, I guess.
MR. KELLEY-There's a big, it looks like a commercial building back there.
MS. CHERRY-Yes. He has some heavy equipment.
MRS. CRAYFORD-That's all Mr. Converse's.
MS. CHERRY-Yes, he and his family.
MRS. CRAYFORD-That's a whole other subject.
MR. TURNER-That goes back a ways, Jeff.
MR. KELLEY-What's the legality. though. we talked about emergency vehicles having access, because that's
a private road?
MRS. YORK-What I meant by stating that in my notes was that the reason there is the 40 foot requirement
in our Ordinance is to allow emergency access to all lots and I felt that a concern of the Board might
be emergency access on a 30 foot wide lot having a driveway extending 225 feet back, but when I saw
that the property abutted April Lane and that, basically, fire trucks or emergency vehicles. if it
had to, could get in through that way, I felt that it might alleviate some of your concerns.
10
--
--
MR. CARR-But only with Mr. Converse's permission.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes.
MRS. YORK-I'm sure if there was a fire or a heart attack, you know.
MR. KELLEY-I don't know. I just wondered about that. He's liable to go out there and say I'm going
to put a deed across the end of my road.
MRS. YORK-Yes, that's true.
MRS. CRAYFORD-Well, the Queensbury Fire Department is only requiring 20 feet for driveways into multi
family dwellings.
MR. KELLEY- I mean, 30 feet, to me, you ought to be able to get a fi re truck down through there. I
mean, that's not bad, really.
MR. TURNER-No.
MRS. CRAYFORD-Right.
MR. SICARD-Isn't there fire hydrants out there, too?
MS. CHERRY-Yes. We do have fire hydrants.
MR. SICARD-There's fire hydrants out there too.
MRS. YORK-Are there?
MS. CHERRY-Yes, Town water.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. KELLEY-Is that Town water?
MR. TURNER- Yes.
MS. CHERRY-They just brought it in, like, two years ago, three years ago.
MR. TURNER-Yes. Not very long ago. I don't have a problem.
MR. KELLEY-It's all preexisting nonconforming.
MR. TURNER-Yes. We've done it before.
MR. KELLEY-Okay.
MR. TURNER-All right. Okay. I'll open the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. TURNER-Okay. Motion's in order.
MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 29-1991 BARBARA CHERRY, Introduced by Susan Goetz who moved for
its adoption. seconded by Charles Sicard:
There are special conditions applying to this property in that this is a preexisting nonconforming
lot of record. It's a flag lot with a 225 foot driveway with the 30 feet of frontage and the developable
area in the back of the lot. The east side of the property is on a private road, April Lane. Strict
application of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of
the land. Strict application of the dimensional requirements, which are that there be 40 feet of road
frontage, would result in a specified practical difficulty and this is the minimum relief necessary
to alleviate the applicant's practical difficulty. The Short EAF shows no negative impact.
Duly adopted this 24th day of April, 1991, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Turner
11
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Shea
USE VARIANCE NO. 30-1991 TYPE: UNLISTED PC-lA JAMES BETH PAUL SCARINCIO OIINER: ALEX POTENZA
MILLER HILL BEHIND EXISTING SHOPPING PLAZA (4 BAY GARAGE) ROUTE 9 TO USE PRESElTLY VACANT BUILDING
FOR A DETAIL BODY SHOP (SMALL REPAIR). (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 72-7-2 LOT SIZE: 4.5
ACRES SECTION 4.020 J
ALEX POTENZA, REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT, PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from John Goralski, Planner, Use Variance No. 30-1991, James BetitlPaul Scarincio, April 16,
1991. Meeting Date: April 24, 1991 "The owner of this property offered proof at a previous variance
hearing that this building could not be used for one of the allowable uses in the PC-IA zone. There
are two concerns regarding this particular business that should be addressed. First, how is the property
to be accessed. If customers are going to be accessing the site from Rt. 9 a guardrail should be placed
along the driveway and the slope should be stabilized. Second, storage of vehicles outside of the
building should be screened from all neighboring properties and roadways."
MRS. GOETZ-The Warren County Planning Board said "No County Impact".
MR. TURNER-Okay. Mr. Potenza.
MR. POTENZA-I'm Al Potenza and this is James Betit.
MR. TURNER-This was a body shop, when Bromley owned that complex. or when he had the Volkswagon business
there.
MR. CARR-Your other tenants fell through, I take it?
MR. POTENZA-Yes. It took, the time process. it took so much time to get through it, they found one
in the City of Glens Falls. They met the zoning requirements so they could move right in, so here
I am back again. I haven't rented it since.
MR. TURNER-How are you going to access?
MR. BETIT-It will be from Route 9.
MR. TURNER-From Route 9?
MR. BETIT-Yes. There will be some coming from Montray, too, from the back, but to tell you the truth,
the vast majority of it is probably going to be coming off of Route 9.
MR. TURNER-How about screening? How many vehicles do you figure that you're going to have in-house,
there? Are you going to work on them? You're going to have some storage outside.
MR. BETIT-I usually, I just work for. like, dealerships, so my cars are in and out. They're not, it's
just mostly small repairs. So my cars are not laying around. They're just for sale cars. I'll
probably, at the most. have one car there, but it wouldn't be sitting there outside, maybe out front,
maybe, I don't know, some days I get busy, you know. fixing chrome and things like that.
MR. TURNER-Well, you've got a four bay garage.
MR. BETIT-Yes, the four bay garage is big enough for.
MR. TURNER-You're going to use one for painting, right?
MR. BETH-One for painting, probably one for washing and one for doing the repairs over here where
you can get two cars in. The other two bays over here I'll probably do the repairs and center one
probably for the wash bay and the last one for the painting and stuff.
MR. POTENZA-I think the question you're asking, Mr. Turner, is a very real one and, realistically
speaking, I would think that they were going to have some cars outside of that. If it works anything
like the garage that is on the north side, I would say that it's going to fluctuate between three to
four cars and I don't think that's unreasonable in that particular area. To say he's not going to
have any out there. I know he wants to get in there, but that isn't going to be realistic. He's going
to have to stockpile a couple of them and the question that you have, in regards to it, as far as the
guardrail goes, that's already been contracted for. We have to do some repair work with regard to,
when we put the blacktop in, naturally, I think if anybody was up there to look at it. we've got a
new flow of the way the water rolls down the hill, so we've washed away part of the hill and it does
need to be stabilized. All of that has been contracted for, and as far as.
12
---
MR. TURNER-There's an area behind the building in the north corner that you probably could put the
cars in and hide them from the.
MR. POTENZA-Yes. There, and I wouldn't be adverse to some sort of screening if that's what you're
looking for. I don't know what you mean by screening.
MR. TURNER-Well. what I'm saying, you obviously don't want to stick them out in front of the garage
because when you come up from Miller Hill you're going to see everything right there.
MR. POTENZA-You can see them, sure.
MR. BETIT-Right. No, because I'd rather have it nice and clean up through there anyway.
MR. TURNER-What I'm saying is, in the back corner, to the north, there's a little bank around there.
They used to park them up in that area.
MR. BETIT-That would be fine with me.
MR. TURNER-That would take them out of sight of Montray Road. It would take them out of sight.
MR. BETH-Yes. I'd rather keep it kind of neat out front, you know, what they could see, it's kind
of hidden.
MR. TURNER-You want to be there, but you don't want to.
MR. BETIT-I don't want to make it all cluttered anyway. So, I'd keep it pretty neat.
MRS. GOETZ-How is this business going to be advertised, in the way of signs?
MR. BETIT-Just a sign on the building, I think, and in the paper, probably, just for opening, you know.
MRS. GOETZ-How many businesses are in your main, is it two? Is there a glass business?
MR. POTENZA-There's a glass shop in there. The Northway Car Care, which occupies the largest portion.
They occupy about 4,000 square feet, actually, 3600. There's a small radio, I guess you would call
it a two way radio store in there. He does use it mostly as an office. It really isn't a store front.
There is one that's vacant in the front and the NWS Electronics, all right, EWNM Electronics store
is located in the front of the plaza. So actually there are four, presently. and room for five.
MRS. GOETZ-Okay. You don't have a freestanding sign at all, do you? I've forgotten.
MR. POTENZA-We have a si gn on the street that says Miller Hill Mall, that's all, and then each of the
businesses have their own sign in front of the business that they operate.
MRS. GOETZ-Because you're set back there. So I'm just wondering if you're going to rely on go by traffic
or not?
MR. BETIT-No. Not really. They can see it enough for me. Most people, they know where I am anyway.
MR. POTENZA-I think. ideally, but it wouldn't meet the Sign Ordinance, I believe it would be to put
a sign on the pylon, but then I've got a problem with my other tenants and it really doesn't meet the
Sign Zoning Ordinances.
MRS. GOETZ-Right.
MR. POTENZA-So the only choice he's got is on the side of the building, there.
MRS. GOETZ-Okay.
just want to make sure he understands that.
MR. POTENZA-He sure does. We've discussed that originally.
MRS. GOETZ-Good. You get business from dealers, is that it?
MR. BETH-Yes.
MR. POTENZA-That's the primary source.
MRS. GOETZ-You mean. they would send you?
MR. BETH-Yes, that's what I get all the dealers, you know, I do all work for dealers, most of it,
very little customers, most of it is just through dealers.
13
--'
MR. CARR-They send you a car just to clean up.
MR. POTENZA-Right.
MR. BETIT-Yes, just to clean up minor Httle dents here and there, you know, spiff them up so they
can sell them for used cars. It's all new stuff, too, there's no beaters.
MR. POTENZA-That's a very fast turnover business, Mr. Carr, because they've paid for those automobiles.
They've got to get them onto a retail lot. So they aren't going to be sitting there a long time waiting
to be fi xed. It's going to be turned around, spun around, and sent back out again. So, there aren't
going to be a lot of retail customers driving down there. but there are going to be some.
MR. TURNER-Are you going to get into the business of buying wrecks and doing them over for resale?
MR. BETIT-No. I don't get into that. I'd just as soon stick with the dealers because that's where
I'm happy because that's where the cars are. That's where the money is. I don't want to sit around
and have my beaters laying around when I could be making money. You spend more money on those wrecks.
MR. TURNER-No, but I mean, you can go out and buy a car that's been smashed up, totaled, for whatever
reason. you can go out and buy the new parts, re-assemble it, paint it, and put it out for sale.
MR. BETIT-No. I'm not going to sell anything on the lot up there.
MR. TURNER-That's what I'm saying.
MR. BETIT-No.
MRS. GOETZ-Is this a brand new business, or have you been somewhere else before?
MR. BETIT-WeH, I've worked at a few other places around Town, a number of body shops, probably 10,
15 of them. I've been in it for a while.
MR. CARR-But you haven't had a business yourself in another location?
MR. BETIT-No.
MR. CARR-I think that's what Mrs. Goetz was asking.
MR. BET IT -No.
MR. SICARD-Would it be a great disadvantage to come in through MontraY, because of the intense traffic
on that hiH?
MR. POTENZA-I don't think it would be a distinct disadvantage, to be honest with you, no. I would
like him to do that.
MR. SICARD-Getting in is easy, but getting out is something else.
MR. POTENZA-Yes, but to be honest with you, I know what's going to happen. They're going to use the
access of Route 9. particularly coming in, because it's the easy way to get in, you know, a short way,
straight down the building and so forth.
MR. SICARD-I can see getting in that way, Mr. Potenza, but I can't see coming back out on that hHl,
on 9.
MR. POTENZA-To be honest wi th you, I thi n k that's the way it's goi ng to be used, just like you see
it.
MR. SICARD-Would it be a disadvantage to have that ingress only and egress through Montray?
MR. BETIT-That would be fine.
MRS. GOETZ-I'd like to see it enforced, though. I mean, I think ideally it would be the best, but.
MR. POTENZA-The only question I've got is how would you do it?
MR. TURNER-Just put a directional sign on top of the hill, one way, down there.
MR. SICARD-You know how that traffic is, coming out.
MR. POTENZA-Sure. I mean, that isn't inconceivable, but I'm not going to be around to enforce that,
too.
14
---
MR. TURNER-That's the best way out, too.
MR. SICARD-No, I can understand that, but if it was suggested.
MR. POTENZA-Sure. I have no problem with that. In fact, I'd like it that way, to be honest with you.
MR. TURNER-Yes, that's the best way out.
MR. SICARD-It's an easy way out.
MR. CARR-Well, I mean, people are always going to find the easiest way out. I mean, I can't see making
that a requirement because then you'vè got to, I mean, you're asking the glass shop customers to go
out that way.
MRS. GOETZ-Yes. It would be good. though, if you could do it.
MR. TURNER-I think they'll find their way out on their own.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes.
MR. POTENZA-I'm not adverse to putting a sign up. In fact, I'd do it anyway.
MR. TURNER-As far as the hardshi p goes, I thi n k he estab1i shed that the last time. It's no di fferent
this time.
MRS. GOETZ-Did we restrict that last variance we gave to that one business?
MR. TURNER- Yes.
MRS. GOETZ-I think we should do that again. I would think that would benefit you also so that the
variance would go with the 1ife of your business there, but it doesn't mean that somebody else could
automatically come in with that.
MS. CORPUS-If I could address the Board for a moment. I realize that that was done the last time,
however, further review of the matter indicates that a variance runs with the land. It can be
conditioned upon termination of a certain time period, however, to condition it upon a certain applicant
or an applicant's business is not legally correct.
MR. KELLEY-I think what we're talking about, this would have to go for site plan review?
MRS. CRAYFORD-Yes.
MR. TURNER- Yes.
MR. KELLEY-So probably the concerns that we would have about a four bay garage would tend to be traffic
flow and parking and storage and that sort of thing, so if they have to look at it anyway, they would
probably address.
MRS. CRAYFORD-I'm sure the Planning Board will address that.
MR. KELLEY-What we would be concerned about in giving a variance that would go on.
MRS. GOETZ-But if somebody else went in there, would it have to go to site plan review?
MR. TURNER-Not if it was a permitted use.
MR. KELLEY-That's the question I would have. Okay, we're talking to this gentleman and he's saying,
you know, we've got a fee1ing for how much traffic he's going to have. You could have somebody else
that says, I have a four bay auto repair shop, but he might want to have 20 cars outside.
MRS. CRAYFORD-Well, this gentleman is not necessarily, he's a detail body shop. Now, if someone came
in and wanted to put a total repair shop in there, I would say that's an adjustment of the use and
he might have to come back to see you people.
MS. CORPUS-And the Board does have the option to make this to have them come back in for review within
a certain period of time. terminate the variance upon a given time frame.
MRS. GOETZ-But I don't think that would accomplish anything. I'd feel comfortable with how you're
seeing that, Pat, as if it was another kind of an autobody used, if that is the way that it would.
15
-
MRS. CRAYFORD-I, personally, think there's a difference and then I wou1d bring them in before you and
if you don't agree with me, you can say, hey, you made a mi stake, Pat, and they can go back and do
their thing.
MR. CARR-The use variance is very specific, detai1 bOdy shop, not auto repair.
MRS. CRAYFORD-Yes. To me, there's a difference between a detai1 body shop and auto repair.
MR. TURNER-Let me put it this way, if a guy is in there and he's renting the bui1ding and he's paying
rent and things get s10w, then he's going to do things, you know, that are different, not necessarHy
different as to what he does, but he's going to do maybe a different operation and you're never going
to know it. He's got to make the payr011. He's got to make the bi11s.
MRS. CRAYFORD-I think I wou1d know it eventua11y.
MR. TURNER-No, but I mean, you wou1dn't know it.
MRS. CRAYFORD-I don't mean to debate with you. but I think wou1d knoweventua11y.
MR. TURNER-No, but I'm saying, you know, just from 100king at it. It wou1d be hard to find it.
MRS. CRAYFORD-If cars started stacking up in front of there, I wou1d stop.
MR. TURNER-I'm not saying, you don't even have to stack them up.
MRS. CRAYFORD-Okay.
MR. SICARD-They've got p1enty of parking space in the rear, there. I'm very famiHar with that 10t
and there's no prob1em with parking 100 cars, as far as that's concerned.
MR. TURNER-Yes, there's no prob1em with room.
MR. SICARD-You can't see them from Route 9.
MR. TURNER-No, not too much.
MRS. GOETZ-Is detaH body work, is that Hke putting stripes on cars and things 1ike that. artistic
type of detai1?
MR. BETIT-Right. Yes, c1eaning the interior and stuff 1ike that, cosmetics, you know, 1ike striping.
MR. SICARD-It really doesn't come under the heading of a body shop. It's a c1eaning situation and
getting the car ready for resa1e.
MR. BETIT-The dent repair is, that's where the body shop comes in.
MR. CARR-You're minor, though. I mean, you aren't frame straightening.
MR. BETIT-No.
MR. SICARD-You're not putting on any new fenders?
MR. BETIT-Yes. Once in a whHe, yes. Whatever they want, I put on. I put bumpers on and anything
that needs to be done.
MR. KELLEY-Let me ask you this, are you a 1icensed New York State Inspection and Body Shop, you know,
where you have those New York State 1icenses?
MR. BETIT-My 1awyer is in the process of going through all the paperwork now so I can get all that
stuff a11 straightened out.
MR. TURNER-So you wi11 be inspecting them?
MR. BETIT-Right.
MR. TURNER-Okay.
MR. BETIT-I'11 have a registered sign and a11 that stuff. So, I'll be a11 set.
MR. KELLEY-See, that, to me, kind of puts it at a different 1eve1.
MR. TURNER-That's a different 1eve1.
16
-"
-
MR. CARR-But I think he's got to have that for whatever he does.
MR. BETIT-Yes. I've got to have that.
registration sign and aH that stuff.
name.
You know, any kind of motor vehicle, you've got to have that
So that will be hanging on the building, too, with the shop
MR. TURNER-Do you have to be registered with the State, just for inspection? You're not going to do
any inspections, are you?
MR. BETIT-I'm not going to do any inspections like checking the brakes and aH that stuff, no way.
MR. TURNER-That's what I mean. So, why would you have to have that?
MR. BETIT-Well, you've got to be a registered station. You've got to have a number out.
MR. TURNER-That's what I'm asking you. Do you have to be registered?
MR. SICARD-So you will not be a registered station for inspections?
MR. POTENZA-To do inspections, no.
MR. BETIT-Not to do inspections on cars.
MR. POTENZA-The only one who'll do the inspection of cars is the Northway.
MR. SICARD-I understand.
MR. TURNER-Yes, or wherever they come from.
MR. BETIT-Because mechanical stuff, that's Northway Car Care's set up. Mine is totaHy different.
I stay right away from mechanical work because otherwise I'm competing on the same property, which
we don't want.
MR. CARR-Karla, I've got an economic question. You said you can give a variance for a time frame?
MR. TURNER- Yes.
MR. CARR-Can you give a variance for a time frame six months after somebody ceases to use the building?
MS. CORPUS-No, it's an indefinite.
MR. CARR-That's indefinite? I thought I'd try.
MRS. CRAYFORD-What is you're concern?
MR. KELLEY-I was going to say, I don't have a problem with this particular tenant, okay, but lets say
we grant a variance and we're saying this is for a detail shop and autobody repair or whatever, aH
right, Karla says the variance now goes with the land. He leaves. Four months later, somebody else
comes in, the same kind of business, but different. In other words, different in that they're making
a lot more noise. They've got a frame straightener that they've put in or maybe they've got four welding
shops going. Maybe it's something different in terms of the amount of traffic that goes on. That
would probably be more my concern, that he might get a site plan, but what's this next guy, does he
still have to get a site plan or no, because it's been approved?
MRS. CRAYFORD-Not if it's the same use as this gentleman.
MR. KELLEY-See, I think it can change with the occupant.
MRS. CRAYFORD-If there was a change in occupancy and someone else seemed to be doing more, intensifying
the work there. I think we can ask them to come in, can't we, for review.
MR. TURNER-That's what I was just going to say, intensity. I think intensity is what Jeff is concerned
about.
MS. CORPUS-Intensifying the use? WeH, the only time intensifying the use would reaHy come into play
is in nonconforming use, and if that's not the case in this.
MRS. CRAYFORD-It's a nonconforming use.
MS. CORPUS-No. It would become conforming.
MRS. CRAYFORD-With the variance it becomes conforming?
17
-
-
MS. CORPUS-Yes.
MR. CARR-But I think you've got the practical restraints of a four bay garage and how much parking
space do you have around the garage that your other tenants aren't, I mean.
MR. POTENZA-Back there, they've got room for 100 cars. I mean. I think Mr. Keney has a valid point.
He really does and a valid concern. I don't know how, legally, he can handle that. By the same token.
I don't expect it to become a junk yard either and I won't let it become a junk yard, but I can't put
that into the realization and protection of what you're looking for. I know exactly what you're looking
for and I understand your concern.
MR. CARR-I think, Jeff, your concerns are going to be addressed by the Planning Board because they
can 1imit the number of cars, can't they?
MRS. CRAYFORD-I don't care for them to do that because I don't 1ike to check the site each day and
make sure there are on1y eight cars there. There's got to be some other way to do that.
MR. TURNER-There's no way you can police that, not that.
MRS. CRAYFORD-It's an unrea1istic.
MRS. EGGLESTON-We11, how about what we did with the karate place there?
MR. TURNER-I'd say, 1et them come back in two or three years and 100k at it again.
MRS. EGGLESTON-That's not unreasonab1e. I mean, wou1d you be opposed to that?
MR. POTENZA-To a review in two or three years? No.
MRS. EGGLESTON-To a review and if we said two years.
MR. TURNER-Give it to you for two years and then you come back, we'n review it, and then if we're
stil1 not satisfied, we'11 give you another two years, because a 10t of things can happen.
MRS. GOETZ-Like, Mr. Potenza cou1d sel1 the property.
MR. TURNER- Yes.
MRS. GOETZ-I mean, I think that you wi11 have control over that, but say you do se11 it, maybe somebody
e1se wouldn't have the same.
MR. POTENZA-An of the questions, the concerns that you have are very va1id and I have no prob1em with
any of those conditions that you put on it.
MRS. GOETZ-Good.
MR. POTENZA-It seems very reasonab1e to me.
MR. TURNER-A1l right. Lets open the pub1ic hearing, then.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. TURNER-Any further conversation? Any other concerns? That's a tough building to try and rent,
I don't care what he does with it.
MR. KELLEY-That's obvious. He hasn't had it rented.
MR. TURNER-The on1y thing he cou1d really rent it for is 1ike he said before, is storage.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes.
MR. TURNER-Do you have any other concerns? None? Okay. Motion's in order.
MOTION TO APPROVE USE VARIANCE NO. 30-1991 JAJES BETIT, Introduced by Bruce Carr who moved for its
adoption, seconded by Joyce Egg1eston:
18
--
Granting a variance of two years duration for the operation of an automobile detailing shop and minor
body shop facility. The applicant had previously and recently demonstrated to this Board the
impracticality of any of the allowable uses within the zone being operated from this building.
Therefore, strict application of the provisions of the Ordinance would result in a specific unnecessary
hardship to the applicant. Without this variance, the applicant would be deprived of a reasonable
financial return. This variance will preserve a property right of the applicant which is enjoyed by
neighboring property owner, in that, with this variance the applicant will have reasonable use of his
property. After review of the proposed use, it is determined that this variance will not be materially
detrimental to the Ordinance or to the property itself and after review of the Short Environmental
Assessment Form, it is determined that this use will not have a negative impact.
Duly adopted this 24th day of April, 1991, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Carr, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Shea
MR. TURNER-Right at the very beginning, you should put in James Betit and Paul Scarincio. They are
the proposed lessees.
MR. BETIT-I was wondering, could you just have that under my name.
MR. POTENZA-He's the one actually leasing the property.
MR. BETH-I'm the one that's leasing the whole thing. So, I'd rather have it all under my name then
to have him in on that because then I could be the only one responsible for anything that goes on.
MR. TURNER-I don't have any problem. Leave it out.
AREA VARIANCE NO. 33-1991 TYPE II SR-lA EDWARD HUMBURG OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE ~EEN VICTORIA'S
GRANT ENTRANCE ONTO PEGGY ANN ROAD, MARGARET DRIVE TO QUEEN MARY DRIVE, 1ST HOUSE ON RIGHT FOR AN
ADDITION OF A DECK AND ENCLOSED PORCH THAT WILL NOT MEET SETBACK. TAX MAP NO. 121-12-31.1 LOT SIZE:
75 FT. BY 120 FT. SECTION 4.020 G
MR. ROGERS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from John Goralski, Planner, Area Variance No. 33-1991, Edward Humburg, April 16, 1991, Meeting
Date: April 24, 1991 "The applicant requires a variance because these units were built with zero
lot line setbacks between units. Although the proposed addition meets all other requirements, the
sum of the side yards does not equal thirty feet. Because of the zero lot line setback these units
are unique within the Suburban Residential zone. This proposal will have no impact on public facilities
and services. will not impact the neighborhood character, and is the minimum relief necessary to relieve
the specified difficulty."
MR. TURNER-Okay. Do you care to add to that?
MR. ROGERS-I'm Mr. Rogers. I'm representing Mr. Humburg.
MR. TURNER-You're Mr. Rogers?
MR. ROGERS-Yes.
MR. TURNER-Okay.
MRS. GOETZ-Are you the builder, or you're just representing him?
MR. ROGERS-No. Neighbor.
MR. TURNER-You live on the other side?
MR. ROGERS- Yes.
MR. TURNER-Okay. That's where the deck is now?
MR. ROGERS-No. on the other side of the road.
MR. TURNER-No, but his neighbor on the other side of him has got a deck on.
MR. ROGERS-No. I'm on the other side of the road.
19
MR. TURNER-Not you. His neighbor.
MR. ROGERS-His neighbor is Mr. Geyer.
MR. TURNER-He's got a deck.
MR. ROGERS-No.
MRS. GOETZ-It's a little patio type thing.
MR. TURNER-It's a patio. There's something there.
MR. ROGERS-Where?
MR. TURNER-Right on the west side.
MR. ROGERS-On the west side?
MR. TURNER-Yes. On the other side opposite his house.
MR. ROGERS-There's a deck there.
MR. TURNER- Yes.
MR. ROGERS-There's an 8 by 6.
MR. TURNER-Yes. There's something there.
MRS. GOETZ-That's what we're saying.
MR. ROGERS-A cement deck.
MRS. GOETZ-It's like a patio, right?
MR. ROGERS-Yes, a patio.
MR. ROGERS-Is that what's proposed here, a cement?
MR. CARR-No. This is a proposed screened in porch.
MR. TURNER-Yes, the screened in porch and then the deck.
MR. ROGERS-A screened in porch, not an enclosed porch.
MR. TURNER-Yes, but is the whole thing going to be screened in?
MR. ROGERS-The whole thing?
MR. TURNER-Do you see what he's got here? Proposed screened porch, proposed deck.
MR. ROGERS-No. This is going to be a deck and this is a screened in porch.
MR. TURNER-Okay, yes. That's what I'm saying. Okay.
MRS. GOETZ-I just have a question. Do you have to sign anything to say that someone else can appear
for somebody? Is there anything like that?
MR. TURNER-Yes, the form's in here.
MRS. YORK-Authorization to Act as Agent.
MRS. GOETZ-And it's signed by Edward Humburg.
MR. TURNER-Humburg.
MS. CORPUS-Although Mr. Rogers would not be authorized to act as agent for Mr. Humburg, the Board can
hear the variance without the applicant being here. It's up to the Board.
MR. TURNER- Yes.
MS. CORPUS-Mr. Rogers does not have the authority to bond Mr. Humburg to any suggestions.
20
--
-
MRS. GOETZ-Was there a reason why he didn't appear himself, Mr. Humburg?
MR. ROGERS-He's out of town right now. He resides in New Hyde Park, Long Island.
MR. TURNER-Okay. So then he bought this and he rents it. Is that correct?
MR. ROGERS-Right. He doesn't rent it. He owns it.
MR. TURNER-But he rents it out, doesn't he?
MR. ROGERS-No.
MRS. EGGLESTON-It sounds like he has two residences, one down state and then he comes up here.
MR. KELLEY-This is his summer home.
MR. TURNER-This is his summer home, right?
MRS. EGGLESTON-His summer home or whatever you want to call it.
MR. ROGERS-His get away home.
MR. CARR-The only reason they're is, in this zone, I mean, there should be a sum of 30 with a minimum
of 10, right?
MR. TURNER-Right.
MRS. CRAYFORD-That's correct, and they don't have a.
MR. CARR-And since the other side is a party wall or a common wall or whatever you want to call them.
MR. TURNER-Yes, zero setback. We've had this before.
MR. CARR-This was in. wasn't this in Dixon Heights, before, this very issue?
MR. TURNER-We had that there and we had one down in Evergreen Park, when John Cifone built the building
down there.
MRS. CRAYFORD-Was Mr. Humburg with you when you came to see me?
MR. ROGERS-Yes.
MRS. CRAYFORD-Okay. I remember that now. Mr. Humburg's very aware that he's doing this.
MR. SICARD-Yes, he signed that. I think that's Humburg's signature.
MR. TURNER-Yes, but that's Mr. Rogers there. Okay. Do we have any further questions of Mr. Rogers?
Okay. He's right on the corner lot, too. He's got two fronts.
MR. KELLEY-Does he? Even if it's common ground out there? That's a common area.
MR. TURNER-This side, here, is a street.
MR. KELLEY-Yes, but the street's 200 feet away or something.
MR. TURNER-No. It's the first house in.
MR. KELLEY-I know, but did you see how much land there is there? That's all common area. See, he's
got written on here, common ground.
MR. TURNER-Yes. but it's not on mine.
MR. KELLEY-It's big. I mean, I thought you could put another whole duplex there.
MR. ROGERS-Yes, they could have put a couple of duplexes in there.
MR. KELLEY-The thing I got looking at when I saw what he wanted to do, I said, gee, I mean, if you're
outside that house, you're highly visible to anybody anywhere you go because it's all open in the back.
It was all open on the side.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
21
'-
MR. KELLEY-If you want to sit out there and let the world look at you. I mean, his request seemed
to make sense to me.
MR. TURNER-All right? No further questions? I'll open the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
CORRESPONDENCE
Letter from Richard Lawson, Vice President of the Queen Victoria's Homeowners Association, "Please
be advised that we. the Board of Directors for Queen Victoria's Grant Homeowners Association have no
objection to the addition of a screened porch to the side of your town house. Please be aware that
our acceptance of this addition is conditional. Your plans must be approved by the Town and the Office
of Zoning Administration in regard to the actual construction and required setbacks. Since at this
time setbacks are not addressed in the Queensbury Zoning Ordinance regarding common wall town house
parcels, we will abide by any decisions of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Also be aware that your plans
must adhere to the following guidelines: drawings submitted to architectural cOlllllittee, exterior must
be Tlll siding and stained the exact color of existing home and inspection by the Homeowners
Architectural Committee or its Board of Directors upon completion of the structure must meet final
approval. "
MRS. GOETZ-That letter was actually written to Mr. Humburg.
MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 33-1991 EDWARD HUMBURG, Introduced by Jeffrey Kelley who moved
for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard:
There are special circumstances pertaining to this piece of property and that is that this particular
home is one half of a town house which has a 0 lot line on the west side of the building. The Ordinance
calls for the sum of the side yard setbacks to equal 30 feet. In this particular case, the east property
line would be 20 feet from the proposed deck and porch. Granting of this variance will allow the
applicant reasonable use of his property. It will also alleviate the specified practical difficulty.
The variance will not be detrimental to the purposes of the Ordinance and there's no impact on public
facilities or services. This addition will have to follow the guidelines of the Queen Victoria's Grant
Homeowners Association.
Duly adopted this 24th day of April, 1991, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Kelley, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Shea
CORRECTION OF MINUTES
February 27th, 1991, Workshop: Page 2, middle of the page, Mr. Dusek is speaking, so he wouldn't need,
sib a variance; Page 12. up from the bottom, first Mr. Kelley, Quaker Village is right at the top,
sib ~ Quaker Village. the brook is right up to the top of the bank; Page 19, up from the bottom, second
Mr. Kelley, sib Yes, I thought when the Town re-zoned to one acre, a one acre lot was too restrictive
MOTION TO APPROVE FEBRUARY 27TH, 1991 WORKSHOP MINUTES AS CORRECTED, Introduced by Susan Goetz who
moved for its adoption. seconded by Charles Sicard:
Duly adopted this 24th day of April, 1991, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Carr, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSTAINED: Mrs. Eggleston
ABSENT: Mr. Shea
February 27th, 1991 Special Meeting: Page 4, Mr. Kelly Carte's seventh paragraph down from the top,
second sentence over to the end, so last year he did about five, sib did about five; Page 5, fourth
sentence down from the top, Mr. Turner is speaking, at the very end of the first sentence at the top
of the page, sib 9 by 20, hospital up on Ridge, the 9 by 20 foot parking spaces we were talking about
22
-
-
MOTION TO APPROVE FEBRUARY 27lH, 1991 SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES AS CORRECTED, Introduced by Charles Sicard
who moved for its adoption, seconded by Susan Goetz:
Duly adopted this 24th day of April, 1991, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Carr. Mr. Kelley, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSTAINED: Mrs. Eggleston
ABSENT: Mr. Shea
March 20th, 1991: Page 1, down at the bottom, sib Barthal (spelling error), Page 18, the second
paragraph above where it says Motion to Deny Use Variance, where Mr. Collins is speaking, sib Adirondack
Scenic not and Scenic; Page 5, almost down to the bottom there, Mrs. Goetz is speaking, the second
sentence where it says, sib your; Page 12, half way down the page, where Mr. Collins is talking, starts
out, yes, absolutely, fourth sentence that says, I mean, Bard's seen fit to move to Bell Rica. sib
Bi1lerica, then next sentence down, Mrs. Goetz is speaking, but it is when we're looking at it, sib
the aspect of using light industrial land; Page 17, down at the bottom, Mrs. Goetz is speaking, where
it says, that would be a bind feature, sib buying feature
MOTION TO APPROVE MINUTES OF MARCH 201M, 1991 AS CORRECTED, Introduced by Joyce Eggleston who moved
for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard:
Duly adopted this 24th day of April, 1991, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Kelley, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Shea
March 27th, 1991: Page 2, at the very top of the page, is sib tabled at the request of the applicant,
not at the request of the applicant; Page 10, names spelled wrong all the way through, Bircher sib
Baertschi, and also Wyman, sib Weinman; Page 12, Neidermeyer (spelling), sib
MOTION TO APPROVE MARCH 27lH, 1991 MINUTES AS CORRECTED, Introduced by Susan Goetz who moved for its
adoption, seconded by Bruce Carr:
Duly adopted this 24th day of April, 1991, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Shea
On motion meeting was adjourned.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Theodore Turner. Chairman
23