1992-08-26
')
#)
-"""'---.-..,,,.
QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SECOND REGULAR JlEETING
AUGUST 26TH, 1992
INDEX
Area Variance No. 72-1992 Gerald & Wanda Bulger 1.
Use Variance No. 87-1992 Larry Moak 11.
Use Variance No. 88-1992 Grossman's Property Development 16.
Area Variance No. 89-1992 Grossman's Property Development 20.
Use Variance No. 90-1992 John Sha w Elizabeth Gaulin 21.
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 ZŒING BOl!RD Œ' APPEALS
ÆCOND REGULAR IIEETING
AlX;UST 26, 1992
7 :30 P.N.
IIEMBERS PRE ÆN T
THEaJORE TeENER, CHAIRMAN
JOYCE EGGLEsrav, SECRETARY
MARIE PALING
CHARLES SICARD
FRED CARVIN
THCMAS PHILO
CHRIS THCMAS
EXEClJrIVE DIRECTOR-ROBERT PARISI
SENIOR PLJ!lNNER-LEE YORK
STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI
OLD BUSINESS:
AREA VARIANCE NO. 72-1992 TYPE II WR-1A GERALD & WANDA BULŒR OffiER: SAME
AS ABOlE GLEN LJJKE ROAD TO CONsrRlX:T A HANDICAP RAMP llND DECK FOR ÆAroNAL
CAMP TO PROVIDE ACCESS FOR fiIlEBLCHAIR LESS THAN REQUIRED SIDE YARD AND SIlORELINE
SETBACK. (WARREN COUNTY PLlINNING) TAX NAP NO. 38-4-12 LOr SIZE: 50 FT. BY
144 FT. SECTIal 179-16, 179-60
TIM BULGER, REPRESENTING APPLICANTS, PRESENT
MRS. EGGLESTŒ-On 7/22, the application was tabled for further information.
We asked for other al terna ti ves, and where is the septic system in rela tion to
the building. We received a letter from Gerald and Wanda Bulger, which reads:
"Minimize variance request alternatives presents practical difficulties. To
change floor plan at the time of the appearance before the zoning Board would
cost applicant approximately $1500. Even if construction had not begun prior
to appearance before the Zoning Board, it should be noted that floor plan provides
maximum wheelchair moveability. Ramp design to enter rear of camp does not allow
wheelchair access to bathroom and bedroom. Request for sewer location. Upon
information and belief, the sewer system is located in side yard towards the
Glenmoore Lodge, approximately 67 feet from the shoreline. Note that the zoning
Board requested that we provide them with this information for the August meeting,
that on August 7th, applicants were notified by telephone that the Zoning Board
needed this information that day if their matter was to be considered at their
next scheduled meeting." And we left the public hearing open.
MR. TURNER-Do you want to address any of the issues that we asked you to address?
MR. BULGER-My name is Tim Bulger, and I'm Gerald and Wanda's son, and if I could,
I'd just like to give you a history of how we ended up here tonight.
MR. TURN ER-I know how you ended up here, but, I mean, we asked you for an
alternative, and you say no?
MR. BULGER-Right, and I'd like to explain that no.
MR. TURNER-All right. Lets have your explanation.
MR. BULGER-Basically, what we tried to do with the first floor was provide my
dad with wheelchair maneuverability, so he could get in and out of the bathroom
and get in and out of the bedroom, and the existing foundation of the camp, and
the way the camp is set up did not allow for that. So, what we did is we combined
two problems, the inability for him to get around in his wheelchair, with a roof
condition that was deteriorating, and what we did was we changed the pitch of
the roof, and went to a 12 foot pitch, and what that allowed us to do was put
one of the bedrooms that was down stairs, upstairs, which created more space
on the first floor, and with that space, we were able to design a floor plan
that allowed my dad's wheelchair to be able to move about in the first floor
of the pool room.
1
-
MR. TURNER-Just kind of going back, we have an outline of the camp here, but
I know we talked about the floor plan before. Do you have a floor plan in that
file, of the camp, the interior of the camp?
MR. BULGER-Before?
MR. TURNER-Yes. We don't have it here. All we have is this little drawing that
you gave us. I know we just briefly touched on it the last time. Do you want
to explain to the Board which rooms are which?
MR. BULGER-Sure. This sketch here represents the existing floor plan, and these
two rooms here on the floor plan were the two bedrooms, and the doorways going
into the rooms, and also the rooms themselves did not allow my dad's wheelchair
to get around beds and to even get through the doorways. Prior to this time,
my dad could use a wheelchair out in this particular area, but he couldn't get
into the bedrooms. The same thing was true with the bathroom. Dad could, on
his crutches, go into the bathroom, but he couldn't get his wheelchair in there.
Both doorway, again, the doorway was a problem, and also the size of the bath,
because you have to plan for wheelchair maneuverability around toilets and sinks,
etc. So, this particular layout of the first floor prevented my dad from using
his wheelchair to go into a bedroom, and also to get into a bathroom. He did
have access, but not by his wheelchair, and there might come a day when that's
his only way of getting around is strictly wheelchair maneuverability. So, again,
to my earlier comment, what we set out to do was not come before a Board and
ask that we be able to build a larger camp. What we did was we tried to figure
out, how could we hold the existing outside structure of the camp, and yet get
some more room for the downstairs, for the wheelchair to get into a bathroom.
So, what we did was, we also had another problem, and that was a roof that was
leaking, and every spring we would go in and find more damage. So, what we did,
construction wise, we changed the pitch of the roof. We went to a 12 12 pitch,
and what that allowed us to do is, basically, take one of these bedrooms and
move it upstairs, which now we have one larger bedroom which is going to allow
for my dad to get in and out with his wheelchair, and also it freed up a larger
area for the bathroom, and we have now a present bathroom which I think you were
asking where the ramp should come from was directly, like back this direction.
MR. TURNER-Right.
MR. BULGER-Right now the bathroom is there, but again, it's there because it
gives enough room for a wheelchair to move between toilet and sink and necessaries.
The alternates that you asked for, I guess again, what we're saying is, at the
time we came here, it would cost $1500, and that's probably low to begin changing
at the time we came here, but even if we started here, came here first, I would
have still been talking to you about this problem of designing a floor plan that
would give maximum wheelchair maneuverability. The only other comment I would
make for you to consider is the point that the variance that we're asking for,
which is a four foot ramp that would allow the wheelchair to be run up the side
of the camp, there was an existing steps that did project out the side yard by
four feet. Agreed, it didn't run the length of the camp, but there already was
an existing steps that led up into the camp, and also on the deck in front, there
was an access to the cellar of the camp, and that was approximately five feet
that did project out towards the lake, and what we did was we took this particular
access to the camp, and we moved it to the back. So, in a sense, we have
eliminated a projection towards the lake of an access, and the eight feet,
basically, I think what we need, the eight feet was, I think because standard
length of lumber. You wouldn't have to cut, but what we need is a space to get
the wheelchair around, and I think if we held, maybe, what the steps were already
projecting out there, that's really enough distance, I think, to cut this corner.
So, that's the explanation of why we designed it the way we did, and why at this
time, to come in the back side would be impractical for us to do, and also, even
if we started wi th you, if the Building Inspector hadn't photocopied the deck
off and said, come back to you guys on that one first, I still would have been
talking to you about the design of the first floor, and how bringing the ramp
in the back of the camp, because we spent many hours trying to figure out how
we could get this so that my dad could get around. Another factor is character
of the neighborhood, and just to bring it to the Board's attention that, just
in our immedia te area, there are a lot of decks off of camps. We wen t out and
took some pictures of three of the camps, and so it's not a request for an addition
onto the camp. It's a request for a ramp and a deck, and there are other decks
close by.
MR. TURNER-Yes, your immediate neighbor to the east, Johnsons is it?
MR. BULGER-Yes. Johnsons have a deck.
2
(
I
'ì
MR. TURNER-They have a deck.
MR. BULGER-The camp next to Johnsons has a deck. We started taking some
photographs. We got out on the boat yesterday and just took some pictures of
some decks. We tried to take some pictures of decks that would be the pressure
treated lumber, because that would indicate that they were done in recent years,
realizing that there's grandfathering and that, but, again, the purpose of the
request is to get a ramp so that we could get a wheelchair up in there. At this
point, with our present configuration of our floor plan, without changing it
all around.
MR. TURNER-Let me ask you this question, then. If you'd have come here first,
instead of going ahead and doing what you've already done, you might have possibly
found that you would have maybe decided to move the camp back farther from the
lake.
MR. BULGER-The whole camp?
MR. TURNER-IS that a fair statement, the camp itself, because you tore the other
one down. You just built this one in the footprint.
MR. BULGER-No. We kept the floor and some of the sides.
MR. TURNER-That's what I'm saying. You built within the footprint, but you put
a new foundation around it. Isn't that new?
MR. BULGER-Yes. We worked on the foundation, but we did it to hold the, no,
I don't think we would have moved the camp back away from the lake.
MR. PHILcrThe way it sounds to me, they've re-done the whole camp.
MR. TURNER-They did.
MR. PHILcrThe foundation up, without a permit.
MR. TURNER-No, they got the permit to build it.
MR. PHILcrThe building permit?
MR. BULGER-We got the building permit.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MRS. EGGLESTŒ-To bring you up to date, the applicant came in with an application,
or he wanted to do an application. He had a drawing of, to rebuild in the same
footprint with a deck around the outside, and within the zoning Department, they
taped over the deck and gave him a permit to build in the same footprint. So,
now he's back with his problem for a deck, which should have been done in the
beginning.
MR. PARISI-I've got a question, if I may, of the applicant. In doing this
renovation, did you obtain a building permit?
MR. BULGER-Yes.
MR. PARISI-So, you have a current Queensbury Building Permit?
MR. TURNER-Yes, he's got a permit.
MR. BULGER-We went through that the last time. What we did was, the plans that
were given to the Building Department did show the ramp and the deck, but it
was a detailed sketch of the floor plan and the 12 12 roof and all of that, and
what the Building Inspector did was he took paper and he taped it over the ramp
and the deck and said that, I can't give you that permission. You'll have to
go to the Zoning Board to get permission for the ramp and the deck, and he issued
a Building Permi tat tha t time and we began construction, and when we arrived
last month, we were well into construction, and the Board's cOllUllent was, well,
you shouldn't have started construction. You should have come here first.
MRS. EGGLESTCW-Well, didn't it occur to you that maybe the zoning Board would
not give you that variance, and perhaps you should plan, even though they told
you that here, making out your application, did it not occur to you, knowing
that in the Town, now, they're trying to keep as far back from the shorelines
as they can, did it not occur to you that this might be a problem?
3
MR. BULGER-I think that you have to anticipate that there may be problems. So,
I can't say that I didn't think about it, but I would say that my opinion was
that what we were asking for was access for a wheelchair, and looking around
the neighborhood and seeing the decks that are next door, and I didn't know about
the recent changes in the attitude. I wasn't aware of that, because you look
and you see new decks going up, and I'm not sure if those people have done what
we're doing here, and that is come before you and ask permission to do that.
So, to answer your question, no, I didn't anticipate that the Board would say
no to a handicapped ramp going into the camp.
MRS. EGGLESTŒ-Thank you.
MR. PHILO-Mr. Turner, can I ask him one thing? en this, you said the Building
Inspector put a piece of white paper over the print and said that it was not
included?
MR. BULGER-Yes.
MR. TURNER-Tom, I can explain that. Why he did that was because he was requesting
a permit to build on the original foundation, all right.
MR. PHILo-I understand that.
MR. TURNER-They just said, I can give you a permit for that, because you're
building on the foundation, but I can't give you a permit for the ramp and the
deck, because you violate the side line, you violate the shoreline.
MR. PHILO-He informed me him that he should see you before?
MR. TURNER-I don't know if he did.
MR. PHILO-According to what he said.
MR. TURNER-But that's beside the point. How long have you owned the camp?
MR. BULGER-Well, it's been in the family for six years. My mom and dad just
became record owner probabl y wi thin the past year. It was in my mom and my uncle's
name in the estate for years.
MRS. EGGLESTŒ-wh y can't the ramp come in through the bedroom?
MR. CARVIN-Or a side entrance.
MRS. EGGLESTŒ-From the back through your father's bedroom. Why can't the ramp,
wi th a door, come through there and keeping it in the back, in the rear of the
premises? I mean, there's room there. I went and looked at that. There's room
there.
MR. BULGER-Except we have a doorwa y that's leading down to the back of the cellar.
That's kind of right in the middle of the bedroom, the bedroom we have.
MR. TURNER-Have you got your floor plan again? I can tell if there's room enough
quick. What's this dimension right here, on that one right there? You've got
24 feet on the width of the camp.
MR. BULGER-It's about 14 feet.
MR. TURNER-So that only leaves you with 10 feet of relief.
MR. BULGER-This is where it comes in the side.
MR. CARVIN-Okay, but is there not enough room for a ramp on either side of that,
just for access to there?
MR. TURNER-The cellar doors are right here.
MR. BULGER-Yes. I think that's what you were talking about last time, getting
some relief. The problem with this as a possibility, there's a tree right here,
and then there's a shrub behind.
MR. CARVIN-How about the other way?
4
MR. BULGER-You mean come in this wa y?
MRS. EGGLESTCN-Yes, or right next to the bathroom, so as not to cut up right
down here.
MR. TURNER-See, the cellar doors are right here.
MR. BULGER-The cellar door's right in the middle.
MRS. EGGLESTCN-In the middle.
MR. TURNER-And there's a window.
right in the middle.
The window's over here.
The cellar door's
MR. CARVIN-But you could have a ramp coming up off the lake side, right?
MRS. EGGLESTCN-No, not on the front.
MR. CARVIN-NO, I'm saying, he's making the ramp go this way up. I'm saying make
the ramp come back up the other wa y.
MRS. EGGLESTCN-How would you get down there? It's a real narrow lot.
not much space between the shoreline and the side of the house.
There's
MR. TURNER-The lake is here. The road is over here. All right. So, what we
suggested before was to terminate the ramp right there and come in through there.
MRS. EGGLESTCN-Yes.
MR. TURNER-That was one alternative, and now Mrs. Eggleston's raised the issue
of possibly putting a doorway in here and coming in here.
MRS. EGGLESTCN-Or if there's nothing in this corner, right beside the bathroom,
and down, then it wouldn't cut your whole room off.
MR. PHILO-What's the elevation drop from here to?
MR. TURNER-Two feet.
MRS. EGGLESTCN-I was going to say, maybe three feet.
MR. PHILO-So, you have how many feet from that door to here?
MR. BULGER-Yes, you'd have to go back quite a ways to get that.
MR. PHILO-How many feet is this?
MR. TURNER-Well, he's got plenty of room this way.
MR. BULGER-Well, except there's a tree right there, and a bush right there.
MR. PHILO-How many feet would you say it is from there to there?
MR. BULGER-Well, maybe eight feet.
MR. TURNER-About eight feet.
MR. BULGER-Eight to ten feet.
MR. PHILO-He can only drop eight to ten inches.
MR. TURN ER-Yes . The road is way out here.
MR. PHILO-Yes.
MR. TURNER-So, he could run the ramp back here.
MR. PHILO-What's wrong with going up here?
MR. BULGER-Well, we'd have to remove two trees, and I'm not sure about the corner
here.
5
\,
~'
./
MR. TURNER-All right. I'm going to maybe shoot your argument in the foot, but
you've got a door right here and you're showing the ramp coming, starting right
here. So, where' s your argument that you've got to move the trees? We're saying
the same thin g.
MR. BULGER-Yes, well, we'd start the ramp the other side of the door.
MR. TURNER-Fine, but you've still got to get around the tree.
MR. BULGER-No, I'm saying, to put the ramp, you'd have to remove the tree, to
go around the tree.
MR. TURNER-How far is that tree from the corner of that house?
MR. BULGER-It's right not even at the corner house. It's right here.
MRS. EGGLESTŒ-Then wouldn't you have to take it down to let the wheelchair through
it?
MR. BULGER-No. There's a sidewalk that runs this side of the camp.
MR. TURNER-What diameter is that tree?
MR. BULGER-I'd say it's about a six inch tree.
inch white pine.
It's white pine.
It's a six
MR. PHILO-With a six inch tree, I wouldn't sacrifice a tree for the ramp, there,
would you?
MR. TURNER-NO. He's go in g to take it down an ywa y.
MR. PHILO-What' s around it?
roof already.
It's close to the house.
You went up wi th this
MR. BULGER-Yes. I came this way. It used to come this way.
MR. PHILO-You're asking for more trouble, with that tree, if it stays there.
If they gave you permission and you took that tree down, would you be in agreeance
with it?
MR. BULGER-I don't know if it's an agreeance. It's what you would say, the only
alternative we would have.
MR. PHILO-I see this is a good solution here, rather than going in a bedroom.
MR. TURNER-See, Tom, he's got 23 feet from the property line to the house, and
you've got a four foot wide ramp. So, what he's is, put the four foot wide ramp
back here, pick up that doorway, and that's it. The tree would have to go.
The last time I think he said this is a three foot door, but you say he can't
maneuver in here?
MR. BULGER-No, I'm talking about the ramp. See, if you're coming along the side,
then you get to here, I don't know if you can turn the wheelchair and get it.
MR. TURNER-You're going to have to, because you're going to have to bring the
ramp up to the door.
MR. PHILO-This is the four foot ramp?
MR. TURNER-Yes, four foot wide.
MR. PHILO-I don't know why he can't get in there.
MR. TURNER-Sure he can. He's going to have to bring the ramp up to the elevation
of the door, the threshold anyway.
MR. PHILO-You're going to have a landing there.
MR. TURNER-Right, to get in the door.
back here.
So, you're going to have to slope this
MR. PHILO-Further, if you go with the 1 on 12 pitch, because wherever that door
is right there, you're going to have a six foot landing, six by four, because
you'd need, from the door, each side, right.
6
)
_/
1'""'\
MR. TURNER-Four or five wide, normally handicapped ramps, you've got to have
a five foot turning radius.
MR. BULGER-So, that's the radius? So, it would have to come out here five rather
than four?
MR. PHILcrNO, four there.
MR. TURNER-You could get away with it there, but I say, under the law, you have
to have a five foot turning radius, if that was a public facility, but you could
get away with a four foot there and still make it with the wheelchair.
MR. PHILcrIn other words, if you open the door, which way does that door swing?
MR. BULGER-It goes in.
MR. PHILcrThis way?
MR. BULGER-Yes, it comes in.
MR. PHILcrOkay. That's all right, then, the four foot's good, four by five,
then you continue your ramp down this way.
MR. TURNER-He can just take his ramp here and turn it around and put it over
there.
MR. PHILO-Right.
MR. TURNER-Four foot wide. They're only going to use the one wheelchair. It's
not a public facility. He doesn't need a five foot wide ramp, at that point.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Mr. Bulger, did you by any chance bring a drawing of where your
septic is and how many feet it is from the residence?
MR. BULGER-It's in that letter. I didn't bring a drawing, but it's.
MRS. EGGLESTŒ-But you're only saying it's in the side yard. I mean, you should
have your drawings of how far and in what relationship the septic is to the
building. We asked you for that, specific, at our last meeting. Is this going
from a summer camp to a year round?
MR. BULGER-No, it isn't. It's still going to be seasonal.
MR. PARISI-Could I make a brief note here. This, and I want you to know,
application came in originally prior to when I was the zoning Administrator,
and at this point I don't have a copy of the plans that were submitted to the
Building Department. It's very possible, howev~r, and this should be an issue
to be raised by the zoning Board of Appeals, that this could constitute an
expansion of over 50 percent, which would require a separate variance, and I
just wanted you to know that that is an issue.
MR. TURNER-We discussed that the first time around.
MRS. EGGLESTΠ-Well, I don't know as he told us, the first time around,
a bedroom upstairs. I don't believe that was in the records last time.
the same size as the downstairs? I mean, is the upstairs a complete?
he had
Is it
MR. BULGER-NO.
MRS. EGGLESTŒ-No? IS it smaller?
MR. BULGER-If you increase the square footage by 50 percent?
MR. PARISI-If you go from 1,000 to 1,500, or from 500 to 750, that's an increase
of, I imagine we have the plans in the Building Department. So, I think that
that really needs to be settled, since that was never brought up under the other
Zoning Administrator's determination. You're certainly in the position to question
that if you like, at this point.
MR. TURNER-I will now open the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
7
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
CORRESPŒDENCE
STAFF INFur
Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner, Area Variance No. 72-1992, Gerald & Wanda
Bulger, Meeting Date: August 26, 1992 "The applicant has provided alternative
information the Board requested. The information is sketchy. The applicant
indicates that there are no alternatives because the floor plan cannot be changed
without a large investment. This indicates that the applicant was cognizant
that they would be creating a practical difficulty rather than designing around
the handicap. The Ordinance would not appear to have created a difficulty for
the applicant. The former Staff Notes are attached. This is a Type II action
and does not require SEQRA Review. The Staff assumes that the Board wanted septic
information to be able to ascertain if there were alternatives. The septic is
not to the rear of the property, so this could still be an access point. The
Board may want more specific septic information to determine if the system can
handle the expansion. The applicant should be advised that this information
will be required by the Planning Board if they review the proposal."
MRS. EGGLESTæ-And a letter from Susan popowski, RD#l, Box 1734, "I am faxing
this letter this afternoon RE: The Bulger matter, because I had to leave Glen
Lake on Monday to return to my business in Vermont. I am unable to attend your
meeting this evening, but I wish to reiterate to this Board my strong feelings
regarding the future of Glen Lake and the need for protecting this area. In
the case before you tonight, a variance has been requested to go closer to the
lake than the current nonconforming 28 feet. This camp is already 47 feet closer
to the lake than the current 75 feet setback requirement. If an eight foot
variance is permitted, they would be 55 feet closer to the lake than current
regulations allow. This is a substantial and seemingly unnecessary variance.
If the reason is for handicap access, I would think it could have been planned
for in the rear of the house and incorporated into such a major renovation.
It appears that this whole house has been rebuilt and expanded upward with no
site plan review required by the zoning Administrator. This request for a variance
should have been made before all the renovations were done, so the complete plan
could have been reviewed by the Planning Board. Now, a nonconforming use has
been expanded, and another old septic system has been allowed to remain very
close to Glen Lake. I would like to remind the Board that we added to our camp
as far back from the lake as was possible, 65 feet, and installed 5,000 gallons
of septic holding tanks in order to abide by the regulations of the Town of
Queensbury. In the interest of the preservation of Glen Lake, I hope you would
hold all residents to the same standards. I urge this Board to deny this request
and uphold the current zoning regulations and reaffirm the reasons for their
regulations." And a call from Jean and Nanc~' Choppa, No objections to the
proposals.
MR. TURN ER-Oka y. It's open for di scussion .
MR. PHILO-You still don't know where that septic tank is.
MR. TURNER-Yes, well, it's 67 feet from the shoreline. It's on the side towards
the G1enmoore, and that's all we know.
MRS. EGGLESTæ-I still think there are reasonable alternatives here that we haven't
been presented with, and in lieu of what we've done in the past, in specific
Mrs. Rourke I might mention, and this lady included, where she was made to abide
by the system, the zoning, then it seems unfair to do a complete turnaround.
I mean, the house itself is close to the lake, and this, another ei ght foot
encroachment is just maximum relief, and I don't know how we can do it. I have
great sympathy for.
MR. PHILO-How about what Ted said?
MRS. EGGLESTæ-The alternatives? Yes, I think they should go back and look at
putting it in the back or, like we asked. That's my opinion.
MR. TURNER-Do you want to table it further and come back another time, with a
different design on that ramp?
MR. BULGER-The Rourke matter, you mentioned that one. What was that about?
8
'--
MR. TURNER-Yes, and the other lady here, that was the same thing, a house too
close to the lake.
MR. BULGER-And they wanted to do what, put a deck on it?
MR. TURNER-NO. They wanted to build a humungous house right up the lake.
MRS. EGGLESTŒ-They wanted to build a big home which would have been closer to
the.
MR. BULGER-And the lady that, I think this letter was read last month also.
MR. TURNER-Yes, it was. We read that the last time.
MR. BULGER-Was that a deck request also?
MR. TURN ER-No.
MR. BULGER-That was a building issue too.
MR. TURNER-I think it sounds like it.
MR. BULGER-I'd just like to distinguish, try to distinguish this request.
MR. TURNER-Well, there's no distinction between being closer to the lake than
anyone else, and that's what you're asking for. You're asking for maximum relief,
55 feet.
MR. BULGER-It's a request for a ramp and a deck, not an addi tion to.
MR. TURNER-Yes, I know, but it used to be 50 feet from the lake, now it's 75,
all right.
MR. BULGER-Yes, but I'm just pointing out that those other two projects.
MR. TURNER-I know, but I'm saying, I think you've got the cart before the horse.
You should have come here first, and then you wouldn't be in the predicament
you're in. You'd have had time to anal yze your posi tion and then gone ahead
and changed the design of the camp, and locate it where it should have been
located, not where it is now. So, I mean, if you want to table it, I'd be glad
to table it for you, if you want to redesign that differently and ascertain the
location of that septic tank like we asked you to.
MR. BULGER-The location of the septic tank, what is that about? We know that
the ramp is not going to go over the septic.
MR. TURNER-I know.
MR. BULGER-If it comes back that direction, it will go over a line of the septic
tank so that if we ever have to repair it, we'll have to go around the ramp.
MR. TURNER-You'll have to go, yes, and under it. So, I'll ask you again, do
you want to table it and come back and look at it again or what, because I know,
right now, I don't think you're going to get the votes to get the approval.
MR. BULGER-But my understanding was you would consider the approval with the
ultimate plans.
MR. TURNER-I'm not sure. I'm only one.
MR. PHILO-What he is trying to say, he's looking at the structure. He's looking
at the septic system, and if you have a leachfield out there and you have any
traffic going over that leachfield, you could disrupt the leachfield, the drainage
could be going into the lake. So, what he's trying to do is protect the Town
of Queensbury and the neighbors. You may not realize, if you bust those tiles,
that the percolation is at one point, you could have sewage running into that
lake. You're only 20 feet, as it is, from the front of that porch.
9
~
MR. BULGER-I guess, again, my question is, that information helps you in your
decision of where you allow us to put the land, or that information allows you
to do what?
MR. PHILO-That information is going to give the whole Board the proper guidelines
to look at that, where we're not going to let you put it over the top of a septic
tank or a septic field, because if you have heavy traffic going over there, if
a truck comes in there or a pickup, something, you could fracture that line.
MR. BULGER-Well, I can tell you right now tha t where the loca tion is, in the
design that you're proposing of the ramp would go over a portion of the line.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Mr. Bulger, we asked you last time you were here to please do
that. It doesn't mean come in here and just tell us where it is. We need a
plot plan of where the septic system is, how many feet the lines are from the
house, where the leach-beds go, the size of the septic tank, will it hold an
expansion of this kind, everything to do with the septic system.
MR. BULGER-I disagree. That was not asked of me last time.
MRS. EGGLESTON-I did. I have my notes right here.
MR. BULGER-I know, maybe, what your notes say, but I asked that question, I said,
do I have to dig this system up to provide this information.
MRS. EGGLESTON-You don't have to dig that up. There are people who can tell
where a system is. Someday you have to know where the system is if you're going
to live there, sir.
MR. BULGER- I do know
where, approxima tel y,
We didn't draw a map.
it is.
where the system is. I don't know what it is, but I know
it is, and I've provided that information in writing.
I agree that we did not, on the diagram, indicate where
MR. TURNER-My position is either you provide us with the information, or we'll
vote on it as it is, and I'm sure it will be denied. I think we asked you for
the information and you didn't provide it. You haven't provided any alternative
whatsoever.
MR. BULGER-Okay. So, there's two things.
I think the system is.
There's providing a diagram of where
MRS. EGGLESTON-You have to know where it is. Some day you are going to have
to know where it is. So, you might as well find it out now.
MR. PHILo-I agree with Mrs. Eggleston. There ought to be some valid proof of
where that is. In other words, we can't take your word. If a guy's putting
a house up without a building permit, or what he's done so far. You've caused
your own problems, and we don't want to see anymore.
MR. TURNER-I don 't want you to have to pay another application fee. So, I'm
offering you to table it, bring it back, like we asked you the first time around,
and let us look at it.
MRS. EGGLESTON-I'll say two things. Maybe make an effort to get a ramp on the
back of the building, or show your distance of where these trees are off this
corner. Show a ramp to that side door, period, not clear to the front and across
the front, but a ramp from the back to go in that side door. You've got to show
all your dimensions. You can't come in here and sa y, there's a tree there, I
don't want to cut it down. You have to show that on your plot plan, this is
where the tree is. It's three feet off this corner, and it has to be part of
your plot plan, so that we know what we're dealing with here.
MR. CARVIN-It's not our responsibility to design these things. This is up to
the applicant to come in with a plan. I mean, as it stands right now, this is
your application, that you want a ramp and a deck, and as Mr. Turner indicates,
I mean, this is the application. We can vote on it, or we're allowing you to
come back with all these particulars so that we can maybe come to an agreement
here.
MR. BULGER-Okay, then the information is the septic system?
10
!'
-"
~/
MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes, please.
MR. BULGER-Okay.
MR. TURNER-Do you consent to table your application?
MR. BULGER-Yes.
MR. TURNER- I don't want to put you through 900 loops here, but I mean, you've
got to bring us the information, like we asked, just like Mrs. Eggleston just
said. We want to know where they are. We'd have to deal with dimensions. We've
got to know what kind of relief we've got to give you.
MR. BULGER-I understand that, but I just, locating where that septic system is,
we gave you an indication as best we could, and so what we'll do is draw a map.
MR. TURNER-That's what we want. Okay. I'll move to table.
MOTION TO TABU AREA VARIANCE NO. 72-1992 GERALD & WANDA BULGER, Introduced
by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Fred Carvin:
For the information detailed to Mr. Tim Bulger as to the Board's request.
Duly adopted this 26th day of August, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Carvin, Mrs. Eggleston, Mrs. paling, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Sicard, Mr. philo,
Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE (8:14 p.m.)
NEW BUSINESS:
USE VARIANCE NO. 87-1992 'IlYPE: UNLISTED UR-10 LARRY MOAK CMNER: SAllE AS
ABOVE 42 BOULEVARD FOR CONSTRUCTION œ A 22 FT. BY 20 FT. ADDITIal alTO THE
BEAUTY SALŒ. (WARREN COONTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 111-3-14 Lar SIZE: 100
FT. BY 150 Fr. SECTIΠ179-17(2)
JOE BELSKI, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT (8:14 p.m.)
MRS. EGGLESTON-The Warren County Planning Board returned, "No County Impact".
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner, Use Variance No. 87-1992, Larry Moak,
Meeting Date: August 26, 1992 "The applicant wishes to expand a beauty salon
in a UR-10 zone on the Boulevard. The use is nonconforming and therefore a use
variance is required. This is an unlisted action. The Board must do a Short
EAF. This application was reviewed with regard to the criteria for a use variance.
1. Is a reasonable return possible if the land is used as zoned? The beauty
shop is a nonconforming use of record. The assessor's property classification
changed after December of 1991. The 20 by 26 existing building is very small
for a shop of this nature. The reasonable return issue is one the Board will
have to resolve with the applicant. 2. Are the circumstances of this lot unique
and not due to the unreasonableness of the Ordinance? This structure is not
usable as a residence due to the layout. 3. Is there an adverse effect on the
neighborhood character? No. The addition will not be visible."
MR. TURNER-Do you know how long he owned that piece of property?
MR. BELSKI-Joe Be1ski. He purchased
He had a beauty shop. See, he rented it.
that property approximate1 y last fall.
They were leasing the last three years.
MR. TURNER-Who had the beauty shop.
MR. BELSKI-The same people that are in there now. It is a beauty shop right
now. His daughter rents it from him, as a beauty shop.
MR. BELSKI-You just said he bought it in '91. He purchased the property. Prior
to that, he was leasing it.
MR. TURNER-Okay.
11
MR. BELSKI-He purchased the property, approximately, a year ago.
MR. TURNER-Have you got an agent's form from him?
MR. BELSKI-Yes.
MR. TURNER-Thanks.
Just run that by me again.
He's leased it for how long?
MR. BELSKI-I think, three years, and he's purchased the property out right last
fall, because I put a water service in there at the time. That was part of the
purchase.
MR. PHILO-Are you the contractor?
MR. BELSKI-Yes.
MR. TURNER-For the record, do they have an occupancy permit for a beauty parlor
down there?
MRS. YORK-I didn't check that.
MR. CARVIN-It is a beauty parlor.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. BELSKI-I think it was operated as a beauty parlor prior to them operating
it. They bought it from someone else.
MR. TURNER-Bought the business?
MR. BELSKI-From someone else.
MRS. YORK-Yes. The only information I have is that the Assessor's classification
changed, at a certain point in time. My understanding from one of the Building
Inspectors was that he believed, prior to this it was a lawyers office, but I'm
not sure. I mean, that's my understanding from a third party.
MR. TURNER-Mr. Moak couldn't come?
MR. BELSKI-NO.
MR. TURNER- I don't think we're goin g to get much informa tion .
MR. PHILO-Has this passed the Building Department?
MR. TURNER-No. They don't see this. This is a use not permitted in the zone.
It's UR-10, expansion of a preexisting.
MR. BELSKI-In other words, if you didn't expand, you, could run it as a beauty
shop? IS that, I don't understand. If we didn't come here to put an addition
on it, we could run it as a beauty shop. That's the way I understand it.
MR. TURNER-I don't know, because I don't know where this went before. Whether
this just got moved in there and was operated, that's why I asked if they had
an occupancy permi t .
MR. BELSKI-The explanation I gave you is what I know.
MR. TURNER-That's why I'd like to talk to Larry.
MR. BELSKI-I know they've been running it there for a couple of years. They've
been there, like, three years, and there was a beauty shop before that, and I
think before that it was an accountant's office.
MR. CARVIN-Do you know who the previous owner might have been?
MR. BELSKI-The owner of the property was the guy who lived next door, Edwards,
because he bought it from the guy that's got the house next door on the right.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Robert Edwards.
MR. BELSKI-Yes. That's who he bought it from.
12
MR. THOMAS-The building, is it a wood frame structure?
MR. BELSKI-Correct.
MR. THOMAS-Roof line, high or low or the same level as the existing structure?
MR. BELSKI-It would be approximately, a little lower.
MR. THOMAS-A little lower, with the same roof line?
MR. BELSKI-The same roof line.
MR. THOMAS-Two accesses, in and out?
MR. BELSKI-Yes, there will be front and rear.
MR. THOMAS-IS it just a one story construction?
MR. BELSKI-One story. It's all going to be vinyl siding.
MR. THŒAS-Is there any intended use of a living quarters in there?
MR. BELSKI-It's going to be an office and the other room's going to be for make
up and stuff.
MR. THŒAS-So, there's no bathroom facilities in the building, in the existing?
MR. BELSKI-There's an existing bathroom.
MR. THŒAS-What about the exterior, to match the existing building?
MR. BELSKI-It's going to be completely resided.
MR. THŒAS-Completely resided?
MR. BELSKI-The whole structure.
MR. THŒAS-The whole structure?
MR. BELSKI-Yes.
MR. THOMAS-What about that carport on the front. Is that going to stay, or is
that coming out?
MR. BELSKI-What do you want to do with that? If you make a stipulation that
it's got to go, then it will go.
MR. THŒAS-I didn't know if you had plans to leave it or take it out.
MR. BELSKI-No. We're going to leave it.
MR. THŒAS-You' re going to leave it?
MRS. EGGLESTON-It would be nice to see some landscaping done.
MR. BELSKI-I said that, too.
MRS. EGGLESTON-It's not a very good looking site.
MR. CARVIN-I was going to say, what about provisions for parking? As I remember
it, it's just kind of a gravel roof and stone.
MR. BELSKI-Yes.
MR. CARVIN-Yes, I mean, is there any prov~s~ons going to be, is it going to be
paved, is it going to be lined? I mean, how many customers are they anticipating
this expansion will bring?
MR. TURNER-What are they putting in, two more chairs?
MR. BELSKI-One more station.
13
MR. TURNER-One more chair.
MR. BELSKI-They have three now.
MR. TURNER-So, they're going to have four stations?
MR. BELSKI-There will be four stations. They're adding one.
MR. PHILO-Where's the water hooked up to, and the sewage?
MRS. EGGLESTON-Mr. Chairman, usually in
they can't yield a reasonable financial
don't have any of that tonight, do we?
a use
return
variance we need evidence
without expanding the use.
that
We
MR. TURNER-NO.
MRS. EGGLESTON-How do we get around that?
MR. PHILO-Mr. Chairman, this is on River Street. Is that into the Hudson Falls
sewer district, or septic tank?
MR. TURNER-No.
MRS. EGGLESTON-It's on the Boulevard.
MR. TURNER-It's on the Boulevard.
MR. PHILO-The Boulevard. Is that big enough to handle it?
MR. TURNER-That's a good question.
MRS. EGGLESTON-And we don't have anything on the plot plan, do we, of where the
septic is, or what type of septic, and would it accommodate more?
MR. TURNER-NO.
MRS. EGGLESTON-See, I think we're lacking quite a lot of information.
MR. CARVIN-Yes.
MR. TURNER-He's only got 62 feet to the rear property line. He's got room enough
for a septic.
MRS. EGGLESTON-But where is it now?
MR. TURN ER- I don't know. I can't tell you.
MR. BELSKI-It's in the rear.
MR. TURNER-It's got to be in the rear.
MR. BELSKI-It is in the rear. He'll have 62 feet after the addition.
MR. TURNER-After the addition. Yes.
MR. THŒAS-Would the addition go over the existing septic system or any lines?
MR. BELSKI-No. The way we have it figured, it'll be almost two. The existing
tank is actually, like, 23 feet, or something, out. The clean out right now
would be in the new basement of the addition.
MR. THOMAS-You're going to have a full basement in there?
MR. BELSKI-Yes.
MR. PHILO-Where is the nearest well to it?
MR. BELSKI-There is no. It's all Town water.
MR. TURNER-Is that an updated septic system for that?
MR. BELSKI-Yes. I believe it's two years old.
14
,/ "
-J
MR. TURNER-So, it's a 1,000 gallon tank.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Did you put it in?
MR. BELSKI-No, I didn't.
ago.
I know there's a new system put in, about two years
MRS. EGGLESTON-DO you know, would it accommodate another station?
MR. BELSKI-I think it can.
MRS. EGGLESTON-That's a lot of water.
MR. TURNER-Axe they going to be working as individuals, or are they going to
be working for her?
MR. BELSKI-Actually, they're putting a new station in, but there's only going
to be three people working there.
MR. TURNER-She's going to have four stations.
then?
You're going to have one open
MR. BELSKI-Yes. I don't know any information other than that.
MR. TURNER-Okay. What's the Board's pleasure. Do you guys feel comfortable
wi th the in forma tion you've got, to make a decision on it?
MR. CARVIN-Well, I don't know, Ted. I'm not real comfortable with this.
MR. TURNER-I wish Larry could be here, because he could answer some of the
questions, and I don't want to put this one on hold, but I think it looks like
that's where it's going.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Did you bring any plan of what the new building will look like
with the siding and everything?
MR. BELSKI-I had just what you have.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes.
MR. TURNER-Okay. I think I'd rather table it to get some information. I think
you ought to show where that septic is and what it is, where it goes, just like
the last guy.
MR. PHILO-Give the size of the tank, too.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Actually, as I looked at it, I didn't have a problem with this,
except we don't have enough information, because it needs improving, if what
they're going to do is improve the looks.
MR. TURNER-Okay. I'd move to table.
MOTION TO TABIE USE VARIANCE NO. 87-1992 LARRY HOAK, Introduced by Theodore
Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard:
For additional information as required for the application.
Duly adopted this 26th day of August, 1992, by the following vote:
MR. TURNER-We'll leave the public hearing open.
yet, but we'll leave it open.
We haven't even addressed that
AYES: Mrs. paling, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Philo, Mr. Carvin, Mrs. Eggleston,
Mr. Turner
NOES: NON E
MR. BELSKI-It' s going to be next month?
MR. TURNER-It'll be next month, right under Old Business.
15
c_
MR. PAA-ISI-If I may, when this comes up again, if you're going to approve this,
since this is an expansion of a nonconforming use, it's going to need si te plan
review by the Planning Board.
MR. TURNER-Yes. I think I'd like Staff to find out if there was an occupancy
permit ever issued for that.
MRS. YORK-I will check that tomorrow morning, Mr. Turner. (8:31 p.m.)
USE VARIANCE NO. 88-1992 TYPE: UNLISTED HC-1A GROSSMAN'S PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT
OWNER: HOSP. MORT. GROUP, INC. AND TRMISCO REALTY TRUST C/O BAYSHORE ASSOCIATES
SOUTH SIDE œ QUAKER ROAD, APPROX. 1,300 FT. WEST CF QUAKER ROAD AND BAY ROAD
INTERSECTIΠPROPOSAL TO RELOCATE AN EXISTING FIVE ( 5) BAY STORAGE SHED AND
CONSTRUCT A CANOPY FOR COVERED STORAGE œ UMBER. GROSSMAN'S IS A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
USE IN A HIGHfiAY COMJIERCIAL ZCWE. BEAUTIFICATIΠCfJIlIITTEE (WARREN COUNTY
PLANNING) TAX NAP NO. 105-1-3 LOT SIZE: 2.238~ ACRES SECTICW 179-23
JOHN RICHARDS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT (8:31 p.m.)
MRS. EGGLESTON-The Warren County Planning Board approved with local conditions.
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner, Use Variance No. 88-1992, Grossman's
Property Development, Meeting Date: August 26, 1992 "The applicant is proposing
to reconfigure their parcel by relocating a large storage shed and constructing
a storage canopy. A use variance is needed for this expansion because this is
a light industrial use in a highway commercial zone. The property is 2.23z acres
located on Quaker Road. The record reveals that the site received a variance
in 1968 to construct a three sided storage building, a variance in 1987 to maintain
an existing freestanding sign, and an area variance in 1988 for a building addi tion
to the rear, and a three sided shed addition. This is an unlisted action and
the Board has to do a Short Form SEQRA prior to a final resolution. The Staff
has indicated proposed answers for the Board's review. This application was
reviewed with regard to the criteria for a use variance. 1. Is a reasonable
return possible if the land is used as zoned? This is a preexisting nonconforming
use. The request is to maximize the potential of the lot while affording greater
protection to the products sold. It is debatable whether a reasonable return
can be made on this site if used as zoned. The buildings and layout were designed
for a functioning lumber yard/building supply center. 2. Are the circumstances
of this lot unique and not due to the unreasonableness of the Ordinance? Yes.
This use has been in existence for 25 years. All the existing structures currently
infringe on the setbacks. The lot is triangular in shape, and there are
developmental limitations because of that. 3. Is there an adverse effect on
the neighborhood character? No. The applicant's operation has been at this
location for a number of years and this construction would not adversel y effect
the Quaker Road environment."
MR. RICHARDS-Mr. Chairman, I'm John Richards, and I'm here on behalf of Grossman's.
with me tonight is Mr. Mark Junta. He's the project manager for Grossman's.
We also have two representatives from C.T. Male, engineers for the project, Tom
Jarrett and Bill Linaro. I don't think you need to have me repeat the entire
application. Just very briefly, we've set up some exhibits here that I think
will aid you in showing what's going to happen, and then I just wanted to clarify
a few things, and then I'm going to turn it over to Mark briefly. The first
one, this is the existing building set up here, and if you can see it, this is
part of an overall site beautification, and we've got the main store here on
what would be the northeast corner of the lot, actually, Quaker Road being down
here, and then over on the western side of this triangular lot, there are two
existing sheds, one's a five bay and one's a four and a half bay. In between
the sheds and the store is the open storage of the lumber, which is really what
we're trying to eliminate here. What we propose, now, is to eliminate one shed
and move it over to the rear of the lot, cover the existing storage with that
open sided shed which Mark can explain in a Ii ttle more detail in just a second,
and then leave the existing, the one shed here, and the main store would be
un chan ged .
MR. PHILO-Excuse me. Could I ask you one question? You're going to eliminate
that one shed right there?
MR. RICHARDS-We're going to relocate it.
16
---
MR. PHI LcrWhere ' sit goin g?
MR. RICHARDS-To the rear.
MR. PHILcrSo, it's going to be out of that location?
MR. RICHARDS-That's correct. This will stay. There's two sheds there that are
adjacent to each other right now. One will go and one will stay. Now, I wanted
to just talk about two things, to clarify, just so there's no misunderstanding.
We're here because the Planning Department has taken the position of giving a
use variance. Frankly, and with all due respect to them, I don't see why, if
there's really no increase in business activity here. This is strictly a way
to better protect what's already there, but we're here, and we're ready to follow
through. I just wanted to make it clear that this is not part of some huge site
expansion, or any big business expansion that's requiring this. This is strictly
to protect the existing inventory. Reall y, while we're here, we don't think
a use variance is required.
MR. TURNER-You're going to take all that lumber you've got, that's stored outdoors,
and get it under the sheds where you go out and pick out what you want?
MARK JUNTA
MR. JUNTA-Yes. We're going to utilize what we're calling a covered lumber storage
rack. The photograph's a similar structure tha t we buil t in Connecticut. It
will not be that exact same, but it will be real similar.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. PHILcrThis is the shed you're going to put up in the back?
MRS. EGGLESTON-No, no.
MR. CARVIN-No. That's right in the center.
MR. PHILcrThat' s going to stay there then?
MR. JUNTA-No.
MR. RICHARDS-Ma ybe if I could just address the second area, to clarify I think,
a little more. If I could just address the area variance. One thing I just,
there's one minor change from the proposal you see before you, and I mentioned
this to Lee the other day, but I think it's a much better change. In the
application we gave to you, it had a covered storage area that was almost flush
on the property line with the D & H strip.
MR. TURNER-Can I ask you a question in relation to that? Is the D & H strip
up for sale?
MR. RICHARDS-If it's for sale, I don't know if Mark knows, or is able to comment
on it.
MR. TURNER-Does anybody know?
TOM JARRETT
MR. JARRETT-Thank you. My name is Tom Jarrett. I don't know the details of
the proposal, but I do know the D & H is in the process of abandoning that
right-of-way, and I do know the County is interested in obtaining that right-of-way
for a bike path. I do not know where that stands.
MR. TURNER-I knew they were dealing with it, but I didn't know whether they had
a.
MR. JARRETT-We know that.
keep that in mind.
In fact, some of the recommendations we have made
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. RICHARDS-What I wanted to clarify was that this was the proposal that, up
until last week, was going to go on the site. The Company has since decided
17
to put in, as Mark mentioned, an auto track storage facility that is smaller,
that would require no side setback, here. It meets the setback requirements
from the D & H strip, and actually makes the traffic flow even smoother. So,
that's a change, and we think a good change, in connection with that. Also,
just to dispel an y misunderstandings, on the shed that's being removed, it's
not going to disassembled and reassembled here. I mean it's going to be a new
shed that serves the same function, and certainly a lot more traffic. I'll turn
it over to Mark who can address some of his concerns.
MR. JUNTA-Thank you. I just want to give you a brief overview of the site, and
some of the thinking behind that. Grossman's is going through a chain wide
renovation of a lot of it's stores, which includes a drive thru lumber yard.
This concept is accomplished with an outdoor gate here and a system of gates.
The idea is to alleviate some of the traffic inside the store in the parking
lot. A drive thru lumber yard, the person can literally pick up his materials
and not be an arms length awa y from his car to get out. I think it improves
a lot of the site circulation problems that we have now. It would alleviate
some congestion within the store itself. They recently went to, what we're calling
an auto stack system. As John pointed out, we want to try to minimize the number
of variances that we're before you for. We felt even though this system's a
little bit more expensive, that it was worth trying to make as much concession
on this site as possible, and this is actually one continuous shed, and not two,
but we are breaking it at, and replicating the space in back. Grossman's has
also rethought, I know everybody likes the beautiful awnings with white stripes,
but we have gone to a new color scheme. with that, I think I've taken up enough
of your time. Thank you very much.
MR. PHILcrMay I ask you a question on that map right there? On this stacking
rack, what's the distance between the front of that building and this?
MR. JUNTA-That's labeled as 22 feet.
MR. PHILcrTwenty two feet?
MR. JUNTA-That's the route canopy between the structural steel of the auto stack
and the structural steel of that.
MR. PHILcrThat' s the overhang?
MR. JUNTA-Yes. That is from the edge of the roof.
MR. PHILcrHave you got any foot on this side to the property line?
MR. JUNTA-I believe it's more. The eight foot that we were talking about is
from the side yard setback from the corner of this shed.
MR. PHILcrI can read blueprints, and it says eight foot here.
MR. JUNTA-This is eight foot proposed, and that dimension is from the corner
of the shed to the fence line.
MR. PHILcrI built that building, okay, and I know that you've only got eight
foot from the side. You've got a swale coming down there. How are you going
to get a fire truck down there?
MR. JUNTA-That's the eight foot dimension from the property line. I was looking
at the center line of the swale. I thought that was the parking lot. That's
the center line of the swale.
MR. PHILcrRight. Okay. So, you've got eight feet. If you've got the swale
back here, how are you going to take care of this? That's all I want to know.
MR. JUNTA-We will have the 30 foot requirement between here and the structural
steel.
MR. PHILcrYes, but that's from there, but you've got an overhang there.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Tom, might I say that this will go for site plan review, and they
will look at how the cars and vehicles will get around, and the space, if there's
room enough, and the overhang and all of that.
MR. PHILcrOkay, because I don't see it.
18
-
MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes.
Isn't that right, Mr.
They will make them comply if that's what needs to be.
Chai rman ?
MR. TURNER-That's right.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Just so you know, when it goes for that site plan review, that
the Planning Board will see that that happens. Your questions are going to be
answered there.
MR. TURNER-Any other questions for the applicant from the Board?
MR. THOMAS-How many square feet is that proposed roof?
MR. JUNTA-In the original proposal, the roof would have been 142 by 77. The
new auto stack roof is 119 by 40.
MR. THOMAS-Do you have any plans or anything to do with the stonnwater that runs
off tha t roof?
MR. JUNTA-The impervious cover on this site will be unchanged.
MR. THOMAS-The impervious cover will be on the ground?
MR. JUNTA-Yes. It will be on in the previously developed area that's now blacktop.
MR. THOMAS-Yes. It's blacktop now. I know.
MR. JUNTA-So, there will be no addi tional runoff, it would have hit the ground
without hitting the roof.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. JUNTA-It will hit the roof, but it will all come off the sides, this way.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. JUNTA-It will be handled with a set of gutters.
MR. THOMAS-Gutters into drywells?
MR. JUNTA-Onto the ground.
MR. THOMAS-Just onto the ground?
MR. JUNTA-Yes.
MR. THOMAS-No drywells?
MR. JUNTA-I'll refer to Mr. Jarrett.
MR. JARRETT-I'm not sure I can address it in the detail you'd like right now.
We haven't gotten into site plan review yet.
MR. TURNER-Yes. That's a Planning Board issue.
MR. JARRETT-My review of the site is that some of the stonnwater that falls on
the paved areas flows toward Quaker Road and is picked up in the ditch line along
Quaker Road. Some of the stonnwa ter, especiall y to the rear portion of the
property, flows east to a swale at the Shop N' Save property line, and that is
conveyed to the Quaker Road ditch. We would propose to use the same type of
stonnwater control on the site. There may need to be some new catch basins or
drywells on the site. I'm not sure yet.
MR. RICHARDS-All these issues are going to be addressed as site plan.
MR. TURNER-That's
application? Okay.
r i gh t .
None?
Exactly. Any other questions
I'll open the public hearing.
tha t pertain
to
the
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO CæMENT
19
.......~
\.~
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. TURNER-Any
questions? None?
further comment, questions
Motion's in order, then.
from
the
Board,
discussion?
No
lIOTION TO APPROVE USE VARIANCE NO. 88-1992 GRQSSIlAN'S PROPERTY DEVEWPllEBT,
Introduced by Joyce Eggleston who moved for its adoption, seconded by Fred Carvin:
The property has a preexisting nonconforming use. The property has extraordinary
circumstances applying to it, in that it is triangular in shape and bounded by
railroad tracks, and no matter how the applicant were to try to enhance any part
of the lumber yard or building supply center, he would meet with encroachment
of setbacks. The applicant has addressed the issue of reasonable return, in
that this is needed to protect the merchandise of the applicant from the elements
which now is left out in all kinds of weather. Therefore, some goes to waste
and deteriorates over time. I don't believe the variance would be materially
detrimental to the Ordinance or to other property in the district. It's minimum
relief, and the Short EM' indicates no negative impact. I don't believe there
would be any adverse effect on services or facilities in the neighborhood.
Duly adopted this 26th day of August, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Sicard, Mr. Philo, Mr. Carvin, Mrs. Eggleston, Mrs. paling, Mr. Thomas,
Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE (8:53 p.m.)
AREA VARIANCE NO. 89-1992 'l'YPE II HC-1A GROSSMAN'S PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT OWNER:
HOSP. MORT. GROUP, INC. AND TRANSCO REALTY TRUST C/O BAYSHORE ASSOCIATES SOUTH
SIDE OF QUAKER ROAD, APPROX. 1,300 FT. NEST OF QUAKER ROAD AND BAY ROAD
INTERSECTICN PROPOSAL TO RELOCATE AN EXISTING FIVE (5) BAY STORAGE SHED AND
CONSTRUCT A CANOPy FOR COVERED STORAGE OF LUMBER. SIDE AND REAR YARDS fIOULD
NOT MEET CODE REQUIREMENTS. STORAGE CANOPY WILL BE ZERO FEET FROIl TlIE LOT LINE.
FIVE BAY SHED WILL BE 6 FEET AND 8 FEET FRŒ TlIE SIDE LINES. BBAUTIFICATIŒ
COHMI7'TEB (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX lIAP NO. 105-1-3 LOT SIZE: 2.238~ ACRES
SECTIΠ179-23 C
JOHN RICHARDS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT (8:53 p.m.)
MRS. EGGLESTON-The Warren County Planning Board approved with local conditions.
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Lee A. York, Area Variance No. 89-1992, Grossman's Property Development,
Meeting Date: August 26, 1992 "The applicant is proposing to locate a covered
storage area on the property line with zero setbacks in lieu of the required
20 foot minimum and the sum being 50 feet. The sum is +8 feet with the location
of the retail center. The applicant also proposes to move an existing shed to
the rear of the property. The setback on this building will be six feet on the
west side and eight feet on the east side. This means relief of 14 feet on the
west and 12 feet on the east to meet the minimum. The sum will still not equal
50 feet. The Board may want to factor that in. Permeability would not appear
to be a factor, as the applicant has indicated to the Staff that impermeable
surfaces will be removed so that there is no net loss of permeable area. This
should be discussed with the applicant. This is a Type II application and SEQRA
need not be addressed. Describe the practical difficulty which does not allow
placement of a structure which meets the zoning requirements. The site is
triangular and currently all structures are nonconforming. Is this the minimum
variance necessary to alleviate the specified practical difficulty, or is there
any other option available which would require no variance? The canopy for the
storage yard cannot be reduced because of the need to protect the wood. The
moved storage shed might be possible to reduce except that it is already
constructed and is simply being relocated. Would this variance be detrimental
to the other properties in the district or neighborhood or conflict wi th the
objectives of any plan or policy of the Town? No. What are the effects of the
variance on public facilities and services? None. Is this request the minimum
relief necessary to alleviate the specified practical difficulty? The Board
must determine if the developer needs both the canopy and the storage shed.
There may be a possibility to reduce the scale of the development."
MR. TURNER-Do you want to address that issue?
MR. RICHARDS-Obviously, now, we don't need the side setback.
20
MR. TURNER-No, you don't need it.
MR. RICHARDS-And the shed is self evident from the shape of the lot that we've
got a practical difficulty. We can't have a covered storage and have it stay
where it is a t zero setbacks. So, I think it's an overall enhancemen t. I'd
answer an y questions.
MR. TURNER-Where else are you going to put it? Does anybody have a problem with
where he's going to put it?
MRS. EGGLESTON-I don't.
MR. TURNER-Okay. No questions? I'll open the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO C(MJŒNT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. TURNER-No discussion? Motion's in order.
IIOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIAlICE NO. 89-1992 GROSSllAlI·S PROPERTY DEVEWPJlENT,
Introduced by Joyce Eggleston who moved for its adoption, seconded by Theodore
Turner:
And grant the applicant relief of 14 feet on the west and 12 feet on the east,
in order to relocate an existing shed to the rear of the property, the practical
difficulty being that the size of the lot being triangular and all structures
are currently nonconforming, there is no other alternative. No matter what the
applicant tries to do, it's going to be an encroachment on setbacks. This appears
to be the minimum request to alleviate the practical difficulty. I don't believe
the variance would be detrimental to other properties in the district or
neighborhood or conflict with the objectives of any plan or policy of the Town.
There are no effects of the variance on public facili ties and services, and no
neighborhood opposition.
Duly adopted this 26th day of August, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Thomas, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Philo, Mr. Carvin, Mrs. Eggleston, Mrs. Paling,
Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE (9:03 p.m.)
USE VARIANCE NO. 90-1992 fiPE: UNLISTED LI-1A JOHN SHAll ELIZABETH GAULIN
OWNER: TEKLA MICHAUD 14# RIVER STREET TO OPEN A USED CAR SALES LOT ŒLY.
NO REPAIRS OR JUNK CAR. NOT TO EXCEED 6 'fi} 8 CARS LISTED IN LEASE AGREEMENT.
BEAUTIFICATIΠCCWIIITTEE (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX NAP NO. 112-1-38.2 WT
SIZE: 0.15 ACRES SECTION 179-26
JOE BRENNAN, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT (9:03 p.m.)
MRS. EGGLESTON-The Warren County Planning Board approved with local conditions.
STAFF INPllI'
Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner, Use Variance No. 90-1992, John Shaw
Elizabeth Gaulin, Meeting Date: August 26, 1992 "The applicant has proposed
to have a use car lot in a Light Industry One Acre zone. The application states
that the sales lot will not exceed eight cars and that no repairs will take place.
A letter from the owner of the property states that the garage will be used for
detailing. The applicant should be aware that there are certain requirements
for use of paint and chemicals. He may want to speak to the Fire Marshall's
office. This is an unlisted action under SEQRA and the Board should do the Short
EM' prior to a final resolution. The application was reviewed with regard to
the criteria for a use variance. 1. Is a reasonable return possible if the
land is used as zoned? The principal use of the property is a residence, which
is utilized and provides a reasonable return for the property. The garage office
was a car business previously. It is within 28 feet of the road. The Board
will have to ascertain if usage of this area is necessary to provide a reasonable
21
return. 2. Are the circumstances of the lot unique and not due to the
unreasonableness of the Ordinance? The lot is located in a Light Industrial
zone and the residential use is nonconforming. The garage office could be used
as an accessory use. Passenger limousine services are also allowable in the
Light Industry zone with site ·plan review. Is there an adverse effect on the
neighborhood character? The only concerns would be the use of and storage of
chemicals on the si te, and the potential interruption of the traffic flow on
a major arterial."
MR. TURNER-Mr. Brennan.
MR. BRENNAN-Good evening, Mr. Chairman. My name's Joe Brennan. I represent
the applicant here, John Shaw. As you are aware from the application, this is
a .15 acre lot with 100 feet of frontage on River Street. The general area,
basically, on the east it's adjoined by Zack's Restaurant, on the west by Watkin's
Nursery. There's a residence behind it, directl y to the north. I understand
the history and use of the structure, he has no intention of making any change
of the use of the structure. There's no intention to add any addition to the
building. My understanding, historically it was used for approximately 60 years.
The building was constructed some time in the 1920's, and it was used as an auto
repair facility. As was presented to you in the application, there is absolutely
no intention whatsoever to do any auto repairs. Basically, the only activity
that will take place, other than the actual sales, if it was approved by the
necessary Boards, would be that there would be some washing and cleaning of the
cars. I think what has been indicated in the application Mrs. Eggleston just
read is beyond what was intended use with regard to detail and storage of
chemicals. Mr. Shaw's present and has indicated to me there is no intention
whatsoever for storing chemicals on the premises. With regard to the Ordinance
itself, with regard to the Type II uses that I certainly would not intend to
review them, a listing of them with you, but I think if you look at the Type
II uses that are permitted under the Ordinance, it's not realistic to believe
that any of those activities are going to be conducted on a lot that's 2/3rds
of an acre, essentially, a building that has a total square footage of about
584 feet. What the plan would be, with regard to a placement of a vehicle, if
it's approved, Mr. Shaw has indicated to me there would be intention to place
the vehicles that would be offered for sale in the westerly end of the lot, lining
them up from north to south, so tha t there would be no obstructions wi th traffic,
etc. I think that, I would respectfully submit to you that under the criteria
for a variance for hardship and the other considerations, changing the character
of the neighborhood, that this structure was obviously constructed for auto
repairs. It has one bay and a small office attached to it, which is really not
conducive for any of the permitted uses. I think this would be a minimal
interference with anything with regard to it, and if there's going to be any
use of this property, the owner's attempted to lease this property for three
years without any success whatsoever, and I would respectfully submit that this
would be an appropriate use and the qualifications and requirements for a use
variance here have been satisfied by the applicant. I'd be glad to answer any
questions you might have.
MR. PHILO-I'd like to ask you to explain the word "detailing". I've had two
impressions. I went and looked at this. I have no objections whatsoever. I
would like to have to let me know in detail what this detailing means. Is it
just to go in and clean a car up?
MR. BRENNAN-Right.
MR. PHILO-But there's no painting?
MR. BRENNAN-No.
JOHN SHAW
MR. SHAW-John Shaw. I had a letter with my application to all you Board members
that stated, I have a repair facility in Hudson Falls. Basically, that's just
going to be there to sell cars.
MR. PHILO-The word detailing means just cleaning up?
MR. SHAW-What we're going to do there are wash the cars that are there.
is the facility. That's what that is for.
That
MR. PHILO-Right. That's detailing?
MR. SHAW-Correct. No, tha t ' s wa shin g .
22
'\
~
~~'\
~---'
MRS. EGGLESTON-Normally, detailing means painting.
MR. SHAW-I have an autobody shop in Hudson Falls.
MRS. EGGLESTON-You're not going to do detailing there, which means putting the
stripe and?
MR. SHAW-No. I have a place for that.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Oka y.
MR. SHAW-We're just talking about cleaning up cars.
MR. PHILO-Because I've heard the jargon, detail, is to go in and clean the car,
the seats, shampooing, etc.
MR. TURNER-Is it fair to say you could take detailing out of the application?
MR. SHAW-Yes. I don't know why that was in there. I didn't write that.
MR. TURNER-Let me ask you a question, Mr. Brennan. Evidently this property was
subdivided in 1989, is that correct?
MR. BRENNAN-I'm
subdivided. As
50 or 60 years.
not sure of the exact date. The common owner, I'm not sure,
I understand Mr. Turner, the house has been behind there for
MR. TURNER-Yes.
The same gentleman that owned the house owned the station.
MR. BRENNAN-Yes.
MR. TURNER-What was his name?
MR. BRENNAN-LeClair, Brian LeClair.
MR. TURNER-No, not Brian, before him.
MR. BRENNAN-Sipowicz.
MR. TURNER-Sipowicz. He owned the whole thing. He had a gas station there for
years.
MR. SHAW-His daughter owns it now.
MR. SICARD-They repaired cars there, too, didn't they, before?
MR. BRENNAN-Yes. They repaired cars there.
MR. SICARD-Did they sell cars there?
MR. BRENNAN-Tha t I don't know.
MR. SHAW-Yes, they did.
MR. BRENNAN-They did sell cars there?
MR. TURNER-Yes. Mr. LeClair sold cars there. I know that.
MRS. PALING- I have a question.
these cars going to exit out on
for any turning of cars?
I was down there looking at it, and, how are
River Street? It seems to be very small there
MR. BRENNAN-I would assume that you're talking about minimum amount of cars coming
out, but I mean, it would come directly out of the parking area, the gravel area,
onto River Street. My observations there, I think there's an extensive line
of site in both directions. I don't think there would certainly be a heavy volume
of traffic that would be in and out of the facility. It's of the size that this
can be no more than eight cars.
MRS. PALING-But there's a lot of traffic on River Street.
MR. BRENNAN-There's plenty of traffic on River Street.
23
...)
)
MRS. PALING-That's my concern.
MRS. EGGLESTON-I think they might back out onto River Street.
MR. BRENNAN-Well, I think there's plenty of room for vehicles to pull in there.
If necessary, we could even direct the traffic with arrows or something, and
I would submit that that would be a subject, with all due respect, that may be
considered at site plan review.
MR. SICARD-Is there going to be any new signage there advertising the garage?
MR. BRENNAN-The only intentions there would be with regard any signing that would
be there would be whatever would be permitted under the existing Ordinance, and
Mr. Shaw has indicated that to me that he certainly will comply with any conditions
that will be imposed upon the site.
MR. CARVIN-In your application, you indicated that you are limited to a maximum
of eight cars. Is that correct?
MR. BRENNAN-Yes. That's pursuant to the lease agreement. Mr. Shaw has signed
a lease agreement which is subject, obviously, to the approval of the Board,
and his intention to limit the lease agreement and both the application here,
he has absolutely, and he submits the application seeking only approval for a
maximum of eight vehicles to be sold. He has no objection to a condition being
imposed by site plan review or whatever is appropriate for that limitation.
MR. CARVIN-Okay. How long is the lease?
MR. BRENNAN-There's a two year lease with an option to renew it for an additional
two years.
MR. CARVIN-Okay.
MR. TURNER-Mr. LeClair was out of there in 1989?
MR. BRENNAN-That's my understanding, Mr. Chairman, yes.
MR. TURNER-Is there a move on the owner's part to divest themselves from this
piece of property as a business and keep the piece of property and the house
as a residence?
MR. BRENNAN-I'm not sure what the plans are at this particular time.
MR. TURNER-That's what it looks like.
MR. BRENNAN-At this particular time, it was attempted, the lease agreement.
I suppose if the situation, business wise, was a great success, I'm sure that
Mr. Shaw, at some point, would have an interest in possibly acquiring the land,
but at this particular point, it's strictly a lease arrangement, and there has
been no discussion concerning the sale of the property.
MR. TURNER-I'd ask Mr. Shaw, then, a question. John, the use you're looking
for is a permitted use in the Highway Commercial zone. Have you looked in Highway
Commercial for this particular use?
MR. SHAW-The reason for this location is my other shop is three minutes from
this.
MR. TURNER-Yes, I know, but I'm just saying, did you look in the Highway Commercial
zone for this?
MR. SHAW-I couldn't afford a Highway Commercial. This is just what I need.
MR. TURNER-But you haven't tried it?
MR. BRENNAN-Not at this price. The rental agreement that Mr. Shaw has.
MR. SHAW-I don't really want anything. I'm not opening up Quaker Ford.
MR. TURNER-I know, but I'm saying that the financial agreement between you and
the owner is not burden of proof enough to support the application, just because
it's an entity you can afford.
24
MR. SHAW-That's where I want to be.
MR. TURNER-It's a use variance. It's similar to the one we just had.
MR. SICARD-Maybe I missed something. Did I miss the hardship?
MR. TURNER-It's a hardship. Yes.
MR. SICARD-Why?
MR. TURNER-It's a use variance. It's not a permitted use in the zone.
the same thing as we just had a month ago.
It's
MR. SICARD-What is this particular hardship?
MR. BRENNAN-The hardship here, Mr. Sicard, I would submit, is the fact that with
a .15 acre lot, with a building that was obviously designed as auto repair, and
you gentleman know more about the historical use of this property than I do.
Apparently, it was used for sales. It was also used for repairs. You have the
particular structure that's involved on a .15 acre lot. If you look at the
permitted uses, freight terminal, extraction of sand, stone, or gravel, enclosed
batch plan, restaurant, building supply, lumber yard, I can't imagine where you're
going to find that on a lot of this size with this type of construction. The
hardship really, here, is in fact, I don't know of one other type of use, which
this is what this was utilized for for 60 years, and what the building was
constructed for, what would be a use that would occupy that building. I mean,
I suppose that we could speculate that it could be anything under the sun, but
this is the design purpose, and I think that's the hardship that exists, that
this property isn't going to be used for anything that isn't related to it.
MR. TURNER-Charlie, I'll tell you my position. My position is that the owner
has divided this property to maximize an investment from the frontage on this
property. This was one piece of property at one time. Sipowicz owned the whole
thing.
MR. SICARD-Has this thing been vacant long?
MR. TURNER-Since '89, but that's not a hardship, not by the Ordinance.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Well, Ted, did you determine it's all one deed?
MR. TURNER-No, it's not.
MRS. EGGLESTON-It's two separate deeds?
MR. TURNER-Two separate ones, right. That was one piece of property until it
was subdivided, and this was carved out of it, because this existed.
MR. PHILO-It was carved out a long time ago, though, right?
MR. TURNER-No, , 89.
MR. PHILO-' 89?
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. PHILO-When they separated it?
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. BRENNAN-Mr. Turner, if I could be heard in that respect. I think the date
of the deed would really not be a relevant consideration with regard to this
property. I haven't traced the history of this, but there may be one deed there.
There ma y be two deeds, but in fact, if you're looking at this as one parcel
of land, I think, historically, going back 60 years, this parcel of land was
used for two distinct purposes. The residence is to the rear, and the business
that was conducted in the front, and I think that is what is controlling the
use of this property, not whether or not there is one deed to the property or
two deeds. I don't know what the chain of title is going back 60 years, but
this property here, this structure was clearly used for the business activity
for about 60 years. Now, if in fact this building were removed, certainly someone
25
,.,:-
could not, the rear portion of this property, clearly, has been used as
residential. This business was a nonconforming use for 60 years, and would be
a nonconforming use today, but for the fact that it was discontinued in 1989.
So, I think it's the use of the property that's controlling rather than the deed,
because it's a business use as to the front portion and it's a business use as
to the rear. That's all that's being sought to be continued, because technically,
here, under the existing Ordinance, someone could come in, obviously, subject
to site plan review, and in theory, open a freight terminal on that piece of
land, and I don't think, realistically, that any of the uses that are listed
under the Type II site plan review under this Ordinance would likely to occur
on a .15 acre parcel of land.
MR. PHILO-I think I'd rather see the garage there with the rental, that I've
seen in the past. I bought a 1950 truck down there, dump truck, and tha twas
a junk yard, and it's cleaned up, and it looks presentable, something this man
can go in and we can see our way through. I'd like to recommend the man get
the.
MR. CARVIN-I'm more comfortable with this particular application than the other
one that you, I think, made reference to. I think that it probably would be
a good utilization of this particular piece of property. My only hesitation,
I guess, is I'd like to see a cap, and apparentl y the applicant is not opposed
to limiting the number of cars that he can have on the lot, up to eight cars.
MR. TURNER-Does that garage have a lift on it?
MR. SHAW-NO.
MR. TURNER-Are you going to put one in it?
MR. SHAW-This is a place for her, okay. I have a business of my own.
MRS. EGGLESTON-What will she be using? This will be her office? It'll just
be used for an office for the sale of the vehicles?
MR. SHAW-Yes, that's her office.
MR. TURNER-All right. I'll open the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENl1JJ
NO C(J fJ EN T
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
CORRBSPæDlCNCE
MRS. EGGLESTON-There's a letter from Tekla Michaud, to Mr. Michael Brandt,
Supervisor "This letter is being written with frustration. I hope you can help
rid of it. It is in regard to a closed business building at l44~ River Street,
Queensbury, that I know own. The building is located in front of my house and
has been vacant quite a few years. When my dad owned the property, he had it
rented out as a garage for fixing cars. Tenants never sta yed very long, due
to the dust coming from the Torrington Concrete Plant across the street, which
would cover the cars parked near the building. Now that I was able to get a
tenant, Mr. John Shaw, he has run into difficulties with the Queensbury Board.
He has run into difficul ties wi th the Queensbury Board. He has been trying to
get a variance to open since June 15th, and as of this date, is still waiting.
Needless to say, it is presenting a hardship for him and also for me. I might
add that the building would be used for detailing cars and in our contract, a
clause stating only six to eight cars on the premises for sale. Also, I'd like
to add, while I'm writing you, that when the trash plant was built at the other
end of River Street, islands were placed with reflectors right in front of the
garage door, making it more difficult to park a car inside. Whatever you can
do to hasten the approval of the variance would be greatly appreciated." And
a letter from David Higgs, Webster Management Associates, "I am writing to comment
that we are in favor of use variance 90-1992, to allow for the sale of used cars
a t l44~ Ri ver Street. Since a use variance general 1 y applies to the condi tion
of allowing a business to operate in a residentially zoned area, this use request
in a light industrial zone would seem appropriate for this parcel. It would
be difficult to derive economic benefits from this parcel if held to the permitted
uses. If you visited the site, it is quite apparent that the character of the
neighborhood would not be altered by permitting this
26
--
business. Also, history of this property indicates the existence of an auto
related business within the last two to three years." And a telephone from Tekla
Michaud, proposal will boost the area. She supports John Shaw, and the
Beautification Committee approved the proposal, and a letter from John Shaw.
"Dear Members of the Board: After growing up with a car business at l44lf River
Street, I decided to lease the building, repair, clean, paint, furnish, purchase
inventory, insurance, install a phone, etc., in order to open my business on
June 1st, 1992. How could anyone imagine a building that I removed a service
center on had to be re-zoned in order to open a sales lot. I have followed all
the rules and conducted no business at l44lf River Street. Between rent, power,
phone bills, repairs, inventory, etc., and the fact that summer's almost over,
I am financially devastated. Hardships seem a cruel method for opening a business.
Any and all of you are welcome to visit my repair' facility, Al Autobody, located
at 264 Main Street, Hudson Falls, or see what clean up has been done at 144lf
River Street, and see for yourselves that I run a very clean and reputable
business. As l44lf Ri ver Street had been a car repair and sales business area
for over 40 years, until somewhere around 1989, I am happy to say that I have
restored the premises to actually looking better than it did in the past. I
only hope you can help me open as soon as possible. with a cement thrashing
plant across the street, a nursery on one side, a full service auto repair and
sales lot on the other side, and a hot dog drive in, trash burning plant and
recycling center for the County, all within a quarter of a mile from 144lf River
Street, I can only hope that this problem will be resolved quickly. Thank you
for your consideration." And attached is a petition signed, Jim Watkins, Watkins
Garden Center, these are all no objections, George McCormack, Manager, Torrington
Ready Mix, Marcia Davis, Automotive Engineer, Deborah Burnell, 139 River Street,
Hudson Falls, Joe Walkup, 149 River Street, and Robert Sawyer, 116 River Street.
MR. TURNER-An Y further discussion?
MRS. EGGLESTON-Well, Ted, I know where you're coming from on the other one that
we had. I think what I might say in this particular instance is that you're
not going to find too many people who want to be across from a cement batch plant,
unfortunately. Take it from me. I know. I doesn't make for a healthy
n ei ghborhood .
MR. TURNER-The only problem I have with the application is the division of the
property, and the division of property, in my mind, was to create what we have
right there now.
MRS. EGGLESTON-What would you suggest be done about that situation? By the way,
if we were to grant this, it would be only to the applicant, right?
MR. TURNER-Only to the applicant.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Not, like, he couldn't sell it to somebody else?
MR. TURNER-That's right. It would terminate with.
MRS. EGGLESTON-It would terminate with his use.
MRS. PALING-And can we limit the number of cars?
MR. TURNER-Yes. You can limit the number of cars.
work, no detailing, no painting.
You can limit, no repair
MR. PHIW-Excuse me, that word "detailing".
MR. TURNER-He said to strike it.
out?
Is that correct, John? You said to take it
MR. SHAW-We will withdraw the word "detailing" if you want to. When the cars
are there with that cement trashing, whatever it is across the street, they need
to be washed and cleaned, and that's what she'll do.
MRS. EGGLESTON-There'll be no storage of paint or chemicals, on the property,
anywhere. They just will not be there?
MR. SHAW-NO, ma' am.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Okay.
27
"~
MR. TURNER-I don't really have a problem with what you want there, but the problem
that bothers me is that they took this property and took a chunk right out of
what was there and said, I'm going to get some revenue back, and that's fair
game, but I still say that's the way it went. I'd like to see, if you're going
to let him have it, let him have it there, seven cars, or whatever the lease
states. What's the terms of the lease? What's the length?
MR. BRENNAN-The application seeks a maximum of eight vehicles. In terms of the
lease, it's a two year lease, and Mr. Shaw has a two year option to renew.
MR. CARVIN-Okay, but I'd still like to limit it to eight cars, because if the
lease runs out or he buys the property and all of a sudden he owns the property.
He's no longer under a lease obli ga tion.
MR. BRENNAN-Mr. Carvin, tha t' s absol utel y a condi tion tha t Mr. Sha w stipula tes
that he would consent to.
MR. TURNER-Okay. Motion's in order.
NOTION TO APPROVE USE VARIANCE NO. 90-1992 JOHN SlIAIi ELIZABETH GAULIN, In troduced
by Joyce Eggleston who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Philo:
This will grant them relief from Section 179-26 of the Queensbury Zoning Ordinance
allowing them to operate a used car sales at the premises of l44~ River Street.
This will limit the amount of cars to be on the lot for sale or storage, at any
time, to the number eight, and forbids the storage, use of paints, chemicals
on the premises. The practical difficulty with this property is the location
and the size of the lot. It's in a neighborhood with much dust from the cement
batch plant opposite the premises, which really limits who would want to rent
the premises. It seems to be the minimum relief necessary, in this case, to
allow the applicant a reasonable return of the land. I don't see where it would
have an adverse effect on facili ties and services. There is no neighborhood
opposition, and a review of the Short EAF shows a negative impact, that it could
potentially effect traffic. However, we're assured that signs will be put in
place for exit and entrance so it will alleviate the necessity to back onto River
Street. Other than that, the Short EAF shows no negative impact, and there
is a negative declaration regarding the Short Form SEQRA. This variance will
expire when the applicant terminates his lease or business at the site. There
will be no repair of vehicles, modification of vehicles, other than cleaning,
washing, vacuuming, and polishing the vehicle for sale.
Duly adopted this 26th day of August, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Paling, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Philo, Mr. Carvin, Mrs. Eggleston,
Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE (9:42 p.m.)
MR. TURNER-We've got to have a motion to authorize Paul Dusek to stipulate to
settle the Article 78 brought on by Jerry Brown's Used Auto Parts, Inc., and
that was introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy
Brewer. The Town of Queensbury will not require site plan review because the
appeal time went past the 30 day time period. Do you want a motion to withdraw
the Article 78 from this Board? We're one of the respondents.
MR. PHILO-Explain that.
MR. PARISI-Explain what this is? Okay. Essentially, this had to do with the
Brown's junk yard. There was an appeal by the Planning Board, I think, of Mrs.
Crayford's determination that it didn't need site plan review. Apparently, yes,
it did need site plan review. The problem was that it wasn't within a 30 day
period of her decision. That's what the Browns are litigating, regarding, it's
that 30 days. What Paul Dusek has done is he has a settlement worked out where
simply they're allowed to go through the process without site plan review. They
have to meet all the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, but there are no other
stipulations which would preclude the Planning Board or the Zoning Board from
appealing this kind of a decision again. It's just a matter of the 30 da ys.
That's all that we're stipulating.
MR. TURNER-Right, but the Planning Board's already taken care of it.
MR. PARISI-They've done it, yes, but both Boards have to waive interest in it
before Paul Dusek can settle this.
28
IIOTION TO WAIVE OUR POSITIOlI AS TO THE ARTICLE 78 BROUGHT 011 BY JERRY BROWN·S
USED AUTO PARTS, INC. IN RESPECT TO THE SITE PIAN REVIEfi, Introduced by Theodore
Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Fred Carvin:
Duly adopted this 26th day of August, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Sicard, Mr. Philo, Mr. Carvin, Mrs. Eggleston, Mrs. Paling, Mr. Thomas,
Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
CORRECTION OF IIINUTES
June 24th, 1992: NONE
IIOTION TO APPROVE IIINUTES OF JUNE 24TH, 1992 AS THEY READ, Introduced by Joyce
Eggleston who moved for its adoption, seconded by Theodore Turner:
Duly adopted this 26th day of August, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Eggleston, Mrs. Paling, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Philo, Mr. Carvin,
Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
July 15th, 1992: NONE
NOTION TO APPROVE THE IIIlIUTES AS THEY READ FOR JULY 15TH, 1992, Introduced by
Joyce Eggleston who moved for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard:
Duly adopted this 26th day of August, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Sicard, Mr. Philo, Mrs. Eggleston, Mrs. Paling, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSTAINED: Mr. Carvin
IIOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL 1lA'l'TERS, Introduced
by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Fred Carvin:
Duly adopted this 26th day of August, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Paling, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Philo, Mr. Carvin, Mrs. Eggleston,
Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
NOTION TO COllE OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION, Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved
for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard:
Duly adopted this 26th day of August, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Paling, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Philo, Mr. Carvin, Mrs. Eggleston,
Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
MR. TURNER-Well, gu ys, I don't know if you know it, but this will probab1 y be
Charlie's last night, and he's one of the original members of the Zoning Board
of Appeals. We'll miss you. I think what I would like to do is offer a resolution
of thanks for Charlie's long years of service and dedication to the Zoning Board
of Appeals.
IIOPION TO THANK ClIARLES SICARD FOR HIS WBG YEARS OF SERVICE Al1D DEDICATION TO
THE QUBENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved
for its adoption, seconded by Joyce Eggleston:
Duly adopted this 26th day of August, 1992, by the following vote:
29
--
AYES: Unanimous
NOES: NONE
MR. PARISI-By the time you have your next meeting, we're going to have another
Planner. The other Planner that we're hiring is going to be in addition to Lee
York and myself. That person's job is probably going to be 70 percent zoning.
What I'm really getting to is because of the shortness of staff, I've been allowing
these applications for variances to get to you, in many cases, incomplete, very
simply, because we have a zoning clerk in the position of seeing them, and we
have to sort of correct it after the fact or not correct it at all. I want you
to understand that, beginning next month, like when you come to your next meeting,
that's going to be a thing of the past. The applications, you're going to notice
immediately, are going to come in much more complete or they're going to be
bounced, and the information is going to be much more complete. I've noticed
things have had to be tabled. In both instances, something probabl y could have
been done about it, and with the institution of what we're going to have in the
system next month, which will mean that the new Planner who's doing principally
zoning work, will be seeing these building permits, which is where the zoning
process is triggered, the first day they come in, which is going to be very
different from what it is now. Right now, I'm sort of a stop gap for Mrs.
Crayford. So, I'm seeing these permits at the end of the process. In some cases,
some of these permits have been meandering through the building for several weeks.
I don't want to go into specific examples, but that's going to corrected absolutely
by the time you have your next meeting, and you're not going to have maps that
you can't read, and plot plans that are missing and things like that. I want
you to be aware of that. I'm very apologetic about the condition of this month's
applications, but I want you to be aware that it's not going to happen again.
MR. TURNER-I think the most important thing you've got to stress to the applicant
is the fact that he does it properly. That's where the weakness is, I think.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Actually, we had made a motion, Ted, that we would not entertain
anyone that came before us that did not have their application. We were not
going to sit here and figure how many feet or let them guess or say.
MR. PARISI-I know. I've seen the motion. Unfortunately, I see many of these
variances after the applicant has been told by a clerk that they don't need this
and don't need that, and I actually have to take the position, almost a
confrontational position with each applicant that's been told, essentially, I'm
the problem. I'm giving them additional requirements. By this time next month,
the process will be in a different stage, so that a Planner will be seeing these
building permits and these applicants from Day one, rather than at the last day.
I want you to be aware of that. That's being completely corrected.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Does our agenda look heavy next month?
MRS. YORK-I haven't had a chance to get down there and look, Joyce.
MR. PARISI-So far, it's mostly Old Business.
MRS. EGGLESTON-Because we've got the Lake George Association on the 18th. Usually,
we do, sometimes we do that by itself, but not if we're not too heavy.
MR. PHILO-Mr. Parisi, I'd like to say one thing. I came down here after the
Board said that they would like me to serve on this Board. I met with Lee York,
and if everybody in the Town was as nice as this lady, she took quite a few minutes
explaining things to me and I was able to look at each one of these sites before
I came to the meeting, and I thank you Lee, and I wish you all the success in
the world.
MR. PARISI-I appreciate the comment. I want you to know, my position has been,
from the very beginning, that Lee stays. I think most of the Board is already
aware of that. The November 8th or November 9th resolution was over my objection.
MRS. EGGLESTON-I want Lee to know, in case I never get another chance to tell
her, tha t of all the work we've seen from there, I think Lee's the most
knowledgeable, for whatever that's worth. I'll really miss Lee.
MR. TURNER-She knows her job.
30
-
"
MR. PHILO-For a stranger coming in, she really made me feel welcome.
MRS. YORK-Well, thank you. I'll miss yo~ guys, too.
MR. PARISI-Just so that you know, thOUJp, this Planner that I said was starting
is not replacing Lee York. There's an ther Planner. We're actually hiring two
Planners. One is starting September th, the other is starting several weeks
later. So, for awhile, we're actually going to have three Planners and we're
going to catch up with some of the h usekeeping that's sort of gotten behind,
a lot of definitions where we have und fined parts of the Ordinances. So, for
a very short time, we'll have additional staff.
MR. TURNER-Okay. If Mr. Thomas and Mr. Philo are going to be involved in the
Parillo appeal, they're going to need a 1 that information so that they can get
up to date on it, because they won't hav it.
On motion meeting was adjourned.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Theodore Turner, Chairman
jl