Loading...
1994-10-19 '- OR,~NJ\l QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 19, 1994 INDEX Sign Variance No. 40-1994 William & Rose Minarchi Brown's Motel L Sign Variance No. 55-1994 Peter Laines Glens Falls Queen Diner 15. Area Variance No. 56-1994 Richard Rouse 16. Area Variance No. 57-1994 Kathleen Martinez, ET ALL Joanne Gavin 18. Area Variance No. 58-1994 Albert F. Chanese 21. Notice of Appeal No. 4-94 Margaret E. Bleibtrey 28. 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. I~ J QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 19, 1994 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT THEODORE TURNER, CHAIRMAN CHRIS THOMAS, SECRETARY FRED CARVII'\ THOMAS FORD ROBERT KARPELES DAVID MENTER ANTHONY MARESCO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-JAMES MARTIN PLANNER-SUSAN CIPPERLY STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI OLD BUS¡'NESS: SIGN VARIANCE NO. 40-1994 TYPE II HC-1A WILLIAM & ROSE MINARCHI BROWN'S MOTEL OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE ROUTE 9, JUST NORTH OF SWEET ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES A FREESTANDING SIGN AT ZERO (0) FOOT SETBACK FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, AND IS SEEKING RELIEF FROM SECTION 140-6 OF THE SIGN ORDINANCE, WHICH REQUIRES THAT A FREESTANDING SIGN BE AT LEAST FIFTEEN (15) FEET FROM ANY PROPERTY LINE. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) 8/10/94 LOT SIZE: 1.01 ACRES SECTION 140-6 WILLIAM MINARCHI, PRESENT MR. TURNER-We'll read the tabling into the record first, Mr. Mi na)"chi . i"m. THOMAS-"MOTION TO TABLE SIGN VARIANCE NO. 40-1994 WILLIAM & ROSE MINARCHI BROWN'S MOTE~, Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Anthony Maresco: For further information from the applicant with respect to the location and the repositioning of the sign and the other pertinent alternatives that were brought up by the Board. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Maresco, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE" MR. TURNER-Okay. So, do you want to give us the information you came up with since that time? MR. MINARCHI-Yes. First of all, I'd like to clarify, instead of o feet, a setback of 5 feet. MR. TURNER-Five feet, yes. I already corrected it. MR. MINARCHI-Yes. I took into consideration some of the recommendations that were offered by this membership, and Mr. Martin and I did measure out and tape out where the recommendation as made, by you, Mr. Turner, in putting the sign near the pool, and, again, that would put this sign in the pool, practically on the concrete, and one of the pilasters would be in the driveway. So that was not a feasible alternative for us. I would still like to mention that, for 35 to 40 years, that motel has been there for a long time. That sign was always in where - 1 - .- the pedestal or the planter is right now. They always had a viable business there. This is what I'm told. Greycourt tells me that, and that was Alice's sister and the whole bit, and then when Charlie got that letter and he, and I was in the process of buying it, like I told you, Mr. Turner, I'm working two jobs. I travel two hours to teach school, every day, back and forth, and still try to run this business. So I didn't have time to play games. Charlie cut it down, and so I did what I did, and that's called North Country and said, look, we've got to get sign up. Now I'm retired, and I'm finding out, I got hosed, and bad. Charlie screwed me because he cut that sign down. It's already cost me two movements. This is the third. I also saw business, every year, go down, down, down. I watched cars overshoot me and come in the wrong way. I've had customers of mine say to me, I didn't see the sign. They had to turn around and come back. I had people walk across the street from my competitor. They said, we like your motel. I said, did you see it? No. We were coming from the north, and they couldn't see it. So, yoU know, you go through all of this and you hear, every day, what's happening, and I'm saying, hey, wait a minute. Something is wrong. Those old people had the right idea. That sign belonged right where it should have been, and where it was for 35 years, maybe 40. I don't know. So I took it upon myself to go down the street, and I started at the Brown's Motel and the Sunset. This is what I've come across, Gentlemen. Sunset, approximately four to five foot from the property line. I was talking to Danny Harris. I know Dan and Joan very well. I said, where's your property line, Dan? He said, right there. That sign that's (lost word). I'm going down to the Village Collection, which is relatively new. That's only six to eight feet. The Christmas Shoppe, six to eight fee. The Meadow Run, brand new, four to six feet, and maybe closer. Whitney Electronics, ten feet, Lake George Zoo, brand new, six foot, the Waikita, you're right on the road. Martha's seven foot. Kay's, ten foot. Cer Cafe and Catery, brand new sign, just painted, one foot. Samoset, four to six feet. Montcalm, two to four feet. Lake George Plaza Outlets, two foot. Adirondack Factory Outlets, two foot. Days Inn, four foot. The Basket Barn, four foot. Route 9 Mall, six feet, and I'm the only schmuck, and I've seen my revenues go down, and down, and down, and I am, right now, less than what Janet and Charlie were doing in '86, and if I have one more year like this, I'm going to have to turn around, not only get reassessed upon what my revenues are based on, either that or I'll have to go into bankrutpcy, and it's a pretty damn shame for a man that worked all his life, put everything he has into it, because a sign, a lousy sign, has given me my problems? Now I don't want to put that big old flourescent sign back up there. If that sign comes down, it's going to be torched and junked. I want to put a new sign. I want to put a four by eight, gold leaf sign. I want something with a little class to it, something that looks nice. The planter will be completely altered and covered. I don't like the stone. I want something that's going to be eye catching and nice, and lit up, but I need your permission for that variance for five foot setback. Is that too much to ask? I have, from Mike next door, Apple Annie's, and I told him my situation. He says, Bill, he says, you're right. That sign is, where you have it right now, it's the pits. He says, I'll be happy to sign it. Like I said, I don't have time to play games. I'm retired. I just retired, but I haven't stopped working since I retired. I'm working harder now than I ever did, but I don't have to get up at five in the morning to travel two hours to go and teach school, and then travel another two hours to come back here. I rest my case, but I do know right here. You can check everyone of them out. I'd like to know who did get a variance. I'd like to know why, then, these people haven't moved their signs. MR. TURNER-Let me say this to you, we're going to find out. MR. MINARCHI-Well, you know, Mr. Turner, I have to say this, it's been eight years now since that letter went out, and in the eight - 2 - '--.- ~' years I was told everybody was going to conform to that, irregardless. Well, you know, I have suffered. My revenues have gone down to zip. I've had to take my own money that I retired and saved and put it back in there to pay Charlie and Janet their last payment, which was over $10,000, and let me tell you something, that makes me pretty irritable. Because of a sign? Now I have no recourse against Charlie, and I wouldn't do anything anyway because they're both very sick. So all I'm asking for is a relief from the Town that I can put a new sign up, five foot back from the property line. That planter stays right where it is. I'm not touching that. In fact, I'm putting it just back of the planter. What's wrong with that? If everyone on this here, let me tell you something. The Days Inn could not move their sign any further back. They'll be right into that glass cage they've got there. There's a lot of these businesses, if they move it back, they're going to have problems. I know this, but this is the way the whole thing is set up. So all I'm saying is this, I would like to have my relief. I want to stay competitive. I cannot be a competitive person in, and you want to know something, I pay a lot in taxes, too much in taxes. I just paid that school tax. That's ridiculous, and I know the County tax is coming up, and that's another killer. I'm going to have to go, take another $5,000 and put it into that account, because that account has no stinking money in it, but my little bank account does, because of a sign. I don't know, but I'm willing to gamble that's what my problem, one of my problems is. MR. TURNER-It might be part of your problem. It's not all of it. MR. MINARCHI-That might be part of it. I don't know, but I'm willing to gamble on a new sign, a new planter. I'm willing to gamble on it, that this could be 90 percent of my problem. MR. TURNER-Well, we told you that the last time when you came that the sign was in the wrong place, and they go right by you. MR. MINARCHI-I understand that, and that's why I want relief to move it back to where it is. MR. TURNER-I know, but I'm saying, it's been there all these years, right where it's been, and you never sought any relief. MR. MINARCHI-It's been there for the last seven years, Mr. Turner, because in the seven years, I've moved it twice. Once from the original to another site, then from there to the present site, and this will be, like I said, I'm not moving it again. Like I said, it will be torched and a new one will go in. There is the letter from Mike at Apple Annie's. MR. TURNER-Okay. You give it to Chris, and we'll read it. MR. THOMAS-I've got the original. MR. TURNER-Can we have that list you've got right there? MR. MINARCHI-No, you don't have this. I just parked and wrote and parked and wrote. Would you like this? MR. TURNER-Yes. Any questions of the applicant from anyone, at this point? Okay. Let me open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED KARL BRENNEISEN MR. BRENNEISEN-Karl Brenneisen from Upstate Signs. I just spoke to Mr. Mirachi a little while ago. He just told me the situation. I just feel that, like he says, if all those other places along that road have their signs, for some reason, less - 3 - --- than 15 feet, I mean, is there a specific reason why his can't be a little bit closer to the road? MR. TURNER-I can tell you, some of them got variances. MR. BRENNEISEN-Okay. MR. TURNER-Maybe not all of them, but some of them did. I know that. MR. BRENNEISEN-If he, for some reason, can't get his any closer, shouldn't they all, the ones that don't have variances now, shouldn't they be made to go back, or at least go for some sort of? MR. TURNER-That's why I asked for the list. We're going to look into it. MR. BRENNEISEN-Okay. MR. TURNER-Thank you. Anyone else wish to be heard? PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED CORRESPONDENCE MR. THOMAS-Two letters. One letter dated September 15, 1994, addressed to Mr. Martin. "Dear Mr. Martin, I have looked into the recommendations of the Board and found that the proposed location would be inadequate. The sign would be located in the pool area where it would not be easily seen from the road. the only location that is open to us is the old location where for 30 years it was located. We are requesting a set back of 5 feet from the property line, installing a new sign lower in height than the existing sign that we now have, plus a new planter box surrounding the new proposed sign. I hope the Board will grant this request, we need a focal point to attract new business and this location seems to be the best. If you have any questions, or require further information, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, William Minarchi Brown's Motel" And another letter, regarding sign location, "To whom it may concern: I am in support of the Brown's Motel in re-locating a new sign at the sight of the original sign. Our businesses are tied together in many ways, if the Brown's are busy then we can expect to be busy as well, and vice versa. I feel that a sign variance should be given to the Brown's Motel. If you have any questions or require further information, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, Michael A. Barsey" MR. TURNER-Warren County. Did you read Warren County last time? MR. THOMAS-From Warren County, dated August 10, 1994, "At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board, held on the 10th day of August, 1994, the above application for a sign variance for a freestanding sign at 0 foot setback from the property line", and it should be five foot, "was reviewed and the following action was taken, Recommendation to: Disapprove The Warren County Planning Board concurs with the Queensbury Sign Ordinance, and it was signed by Thomas Haley, Chairperson" MR. TURNER-Did you go to the Warren County Planning meeting? MR. MINARCHI-Yes, sir, I did, and at that particular time I did not pick up the zero foot setback, and that was an error, and I think that was one of the points that, reason why they were very adamant in that they did not want to grant me any relief. MR. TURNER-Let me just say to you. They never grant any relief on signs. They leave it up to us. - 4 - "--' ',--", MR. MINARCHI-Okay, but again, because of t~he error, I didn't get any questions. I didn't have a lot of information that I have today, in reference to other people. Like I said, I only went up to 149. I did not go any further. So where the Town line ends, I'm sure if I had, I would have gotten a lot more. MR. CARVIN-I think there's a reference to them. I don't know if we read it into the record. I think, I would maybe enter this with the names. I'1R. TURNER-Yes. MR. CARVIN-Six form letters were sent in. MR. TURNER-Yes, just for the record. That will be in the record. MR. THOMAS-There's also a form letter that's been signed by seven customers of the Brown's Motel. They're signed by a Susan Rocco of Blumfield, NJ; Dolly Tech of Jersey City, NJ; Anthony Marante of North Adams, MA; David Rain of Brooklyn, NY; Robert L. Caroso, Jr., of East Hartford, CT; and a Kenneth Hall of Wappengers Falls, NY; and a Domnick Deluco of East Hartford, CT" MR. MINARCHI-Those people, like I said, were people that have been there, overshot us, of where the entrance was supposed to be, and when I see all of this, and you know me, Dave. I'm right there every minute. I'm there 16 hours a day. MR. TURNER-Can I ask you a question? Since this has been a real problem, how come you didn't come earlier? MR. MINARCHI-Because, Mr. Turner, I retired this June, and I did not have time even to go to the bathroom most of the time in my life. I'm up at five in the morning. I'm on the road by six. By seven thirty, quarter of eight, I'm in school. I have a homeroom. I teach school until three or a little after. Then I'm in the truck of mine, and I'm driving another hour and a half to forty-five minutes back here. I get here at five. I give my wife relief from being at that desk, because at that desk can be quite tedious. That was my life. MR. TURNER-Okay. MR. MINARCHI-And when I closed up, I used to come weekends and work on the place, and just work. So this first time I've had to say, God, I can smell the flowers. you're working like a jackass, you never think, really. don't think. You don't have time to think. up here is the When You MR. TURNER-Okay. Any discussion? MR. MARESCO-Mr. Minarchi, you've certainly done your homework. You must have gone out with tape measure in hand, and measured everything? MR. MINARCHI-I didn't use a tape measure. I can use my eye sight with approximate, I said those are four to six, two to three, IrJhatever. MR. MARESCO-So how did you measure it? You measured .it just by eyeing it? MR. MINARCHI-Yes, sir. I looked at the sidewalk in front of the Days Inn. I know that's approximately five foot wide. There was also a little strip there between the first post of the Days Inn sign and the sidewalk, there was approximately two and a half foot to three foot distance, and I'm sure that sidewalk doesn't belong to the Days Inn. MR. MARESCO-I'm sure the sign may be one of your problems, but - 5 - ',-- '- there are many facets that go into running a business other than a sign, and when you made the statement, from '86, things were a lot different in '86 than they are now. The recession that we've had. There's a lot of business factors that come into play, other than a sign. How long do yoU have the motel? MR. MINARCHI-We've had it eight years. This has been the worst year I 've ~ had. MR. MARESCO-It's been bad for a lot of businesses, though. MR. MINARCHI-Yes, it has. and I've talked to them in gross they were down from t.o be the pits. I've talked to a lot of businesses, reference to what percentages of their last year, and last year was supposed MR. MARESCO-Because it's not only your business that's gone down, many businesses. MR. MINARCHI-I understand that, but I also have to look at my customers and the people that are overshooting me. I also have to talk to other customers that zoomed in across the street, which their sign is only four foot off their property. They saw t.hat sign, but they didn't see mine, and mine is a hell of a lot bigger than theirs. MR. MARESCO-So you think they're overshooting you because they don't see the sign? MR. MINARCHI-I actually believe the sign being set back as it is, and where it's located they overshoot me, yes. Yes, they are. MR. MARESCO-I pass by there a lot. MR. MINARCHI-That's because you're looking for it. You can see it. MR. MARESCO-Well, I know it's there. MR. MINARCHI-Yes. You know it's there because it's been brought to your attention. If you didn't, you wouldn't. You know what a guy, just today, came to me and said, you know, I've been coming to this Bakery right next door, Gambles for ten years. I never knew there was a motel here, and I said, my God, and I said, well, we're closed, but he wanted to look at one of the rooms. He said, gee, I'm going to stay with you next year. They don't see us. It's amazing. MR. CARVIN-Mr. Minarchi, if I might interject, do you have an advertising budget? MR. MINARCHI-Do we have an advertising budget? Yes. I'd like to go over that. I advertise in the triple A. That costs me over $2,200 per year. I also belong to the Lake George Chamber. I belong to the Chamber in Glens Falls, that would be the Adirondack, and we were thinking even the Saratoga Chamber. Do I advertise? I advertise up in the Canadian border. Do I advertise? Certainly. I advertise at Exit 19. I advertise at Exit 9. I've even tried advertisements in Ottawa, Canada. Do I advertise in the magazines? Yes, I do. My total budget? Sure, $5,000. MR. CARVIN-But would you characterize most of your clients as advanced reservations? MR. MINARCHI-No. A lot of my clients, I would say a good 60 percent of my people, come in off the road. I didn't get that this year. See, advertising is, we had a lot of vacancies, a lot of room occupancies around us. One of the big factors is the change that killed us, killed the small guy, and whereas this - 6 - .,/" .: ~~ time of the year in September and October in 1987, I can tell you that we had anywhere between eight to fourteen rooms every night. MR. MARESCO-A lot of people were busy in '87. changed since '87. Things have MR. MINARCHI-I'm just talking about rooms, the number of rooms that were built since that time. MR. MARESCO-How many rooms do you have in your motel? MR. MINARCHI-Twenty. MR. MARSECO-Twenty. MR. MINARCHI-But that's what's going on, and so we have increased our advertisement, hopefully, that we would then be attracting more people, but it hasn't worked. MR. CARVIN-Again, Mr. Minarchi, the plot plan that you gave us, here, the current planter, where you're going to locate the proposed sign, is this an accurate figure? In other words, it's approximately a nine foot square? MR. MINARCHI-That's approximate. MR. CARVIN-Okay. That is currently built. MR. MINARCHI-It's not nine foot square. MR. CARVIN-Well, nine feet long anyway. MR. MINARCHI~Yes, in depth. about four. I think in the front it would be MR. CARVIN-Okay, but that does extend out into Route 9 by about fou,- feet? MR. MINARCHI-Yes. MR. CARVIN-Okay. MR. MINARCHI-I was hoping to put the sign at the end of the planter, and into the property. MR. CARVIN-Okay. Where the front edge is five foot off the road? MR. MINARCHI-Right. Well, no. In other words, I would be, the Here's the planter, okay. Here's the planter, in the property. The You have five foot off the road. whole length of that planter. the road. Here's the end of sign would start like this. MR. CARVIN-And then continue back into the property. MR. MINARCHI-And then continue back in four feet, five feet, whatever the sign would be. MR. CARVIN-Okay. I'm not opposed to the sign. I want you to understand this, but what I am very, very concerned about. MR. MENTER-This here part is, he drew this in. existing. He added that on to give this. This is not MR. CARVIN-Okay. Well, then I guess I'm confused. MR. MENTER-Yes. He was coming, in from that, out toward the road from the inside edge. MR. CARVIN-Okay, because I thought that was a photograph. was just a highlight. That - 7 - "'--' --./ MR. TURNER-What he's saying is the planter is going to be five feet off the p~operty line and the sign's going to be behind that. MR. CARVIN-Okay. So you will be actually adding to that. MR. MINARCHI-To the planter, yes. MR. CARVIN-To the planter. Okay. That was my question. Okay. MR. MENTER-So this will be nine feet total. So if this is five, and plus four. MR. TURNER-He said he's going to do something different with the planter. MR. MINARCHI-I'm going to resurface the face. MR. CARVIN-As Mr. Menter accurate description, here? where the five feet starts. planter? has pointed out, here, is that an I guess I'm trying to figure out In other words, this is the current MR. MINARCHI-This is the planter as it is right now, right there. MR. CARVIN-Okay. So that's roughly nine feet there? MR. MINARCHI-This is about nine. Right. Now the new one, then, would start right on the end, and whatever distance it would be. I'm hoping that I only have to go out four foot. MR. TURNER-You're going back toward the back of the motel? MR. MINARCHI-Yes. ,- oad . The four foot would be back away from the MR. CARVIN-You wouldn't take off the front four feet, would you? MR. MINARCHI-No, to remove all that masonry. MR. CARVIN-All right. What I'd like to try to do is get the relief down from, basically 66 and 2/3rds. If we could pick up another couple of feet, it would bring it down to about a 50 percent relief. Mf~. TURNER-Yes. MR. CARVIN-If that would be possible. If we could stretch it to seven feet, for example, or even eight feet. MR. MINARCHI-I know that we can get it to, you mean from the front to the back? MR. CARVIN-No. In other words, the amount of relief requested is five feet. Well you've got four feet out that we can't do anything about, unless you want to lop it off. MR. MINARCHI-No. I don't want to do that. MS. CIPPERLY-Yes. I think the one reason that you wanted to put it where you put it is that there's an existing support for. MR. TURNER-Base? MR. MINARCHI-See, there's an existing concrete base, here, with with steel, that we can use to attach a sign to. That's the reason why I wanted to use that. MR. TURNER-That's the old base of the old sign. - 8 - "'---' '"-'" MR. MINARCHI-But I won't use this. sign. This is not going to be the MR. CARVIN-In other words, is your sign guy here? any idea of what the sign is going to look like? Do you have MR. MINARCHI-The wife was talking about gold leaf, and it will be a complete new sign. It won't be as high as this. It'll be lo~.,¡er . MR. CARVIN-Is this post exactly five feet? that? Have you measured MR. MINARCHI-It's about five feet. MR. CARVIN-About. Which way, four and a half or six? MR. MINARCHI-I would say about five two, five one. MR. CARVIN-Okay. MR. FORD-What are your plans for the existing sign? MR. MINARCHI-That's going to be scratched. MR. CARVIN-Actually, I guess I'm not really concerned. If I still can get a couple of feet, because you can always reanchor it. If this is all going to be new, you're going to have to put in a whole new post anyway. MR. TURNER-Is it going to be single pole? MR. MINARCHI-I don't know. I don't think so. If I can get away with a single pole, then one post right here, but I don't know if that. MR. CARVIN-Well, see, it's the front edge of the sign, in other words, the five feet. MR. TURNER-Thirty-two square foot sign, single pole. MR. MINARCHI-Four by eight. MR. TURNER-Single pole, I would think. MR. MINARCHI-Single pole, four by eight? MR. BRENNEISEN-It depends on the design. If you're going to go with a wood sign, it all depends on the design, how you design it. I just met Mr. Minarchi today, when I was working at the Diner, doing a neon job, and he mentioned that he wanted to have a new sign built, but we haven't even gotten to the planning stage yet. MR. TURNER-So this is going to stay? Is that what you're saying? This four foot is going to stay? MR. CARVIN-Yes. That's going to be out in the, that's already there. MR. TURNER-It's there. MR. MINARCHI-Yes. See there's a telephone pole here. There's a concrete (lost word). MR. MENTER-Because there is a telephone pole here. It would be a nasty situation without that island there, the pole would be real da nger ous . MR. MINARCHI-Yes. If you remove that, that pole has got - 9 - ----- -../ troubles. MR. MENTER-Yes. MR. CARVIN-Well, if we could get two more feet, I would feel a lot more comfortable in the relief. MR. MINARCHI-Would you be happy with one? MR. CARVIN-We're talking twelve inches either way, here. I don't know. How does the rest of the Board feel? MR. KARPELES-Well, I know Mr. Minarchi feels very strongly this is his whole problem, but I drove by that motel, both ways, and I didn't have a bit of trouble seeing that sign from either direction. MR. MINARCHI-I'm sure you didn't. MR. CARVIN-I don't think the sign is going to be, it may playa factor, but I'm not positive that it's the main factor, but if you feel more comfortable, again, I think you have a legitimate argument for relief, but I think 'cl..ê. have a legitimate argument in granting minimum relief. MR. MINARCHI-I want to point this out. I'm not quite sure about this here. This here is a trench, or this is an electrical conduit under here. So when you said, would you go back two foot, I don't know if this would be resting right on top of t.here. MR. CARVIN-That may be just a technical consideration, because there's certainly a number of ways you can design a sign. You can always design a sign, you know, you can do it something like that. MR. MINARCHI-Yes. MR. CARVIN-Do you know what I'm saying? So, I mean, those are architectural challenges. The relief is the issue. The Board is governed, primarily, by minimum relief, and we have to weigh the benefit to the applicant versus the "detriment to the community", and I feel, you've got a legitimate argument here, but I. MR. MINARCHI-What detriment to the community would you see here? MR. CARVIN-Well, the next person that comes in and gives us a list of 37 signs and has your name on it as having. MR. MINARCHI-That would be a detriment to the community? MR. CARVIN-Well, it's not necessarily a detriment. We do look at each case individually, but it does have a cumulative effect over t.ime, if you know what I'm saying, but we have to be guided by minimum relief. MR. MINARCHI-You know, Mr. Carvin, we've had eight years. Eight years. MR. CARVIN-Yes, and I realize eight years, your revenues have couple of months you've come in. person. that you've been busy, but for been going down, and only this I mean, I realize you're a busy MR. MINARCHI-You have no idea how busy I am, Mr. Carvin. MR. CARVIN-But, myself, I would still feel more comfortable if we could get it back seven feet. MR. MINARCHI-If you make the recommendation and it's approved, I - 10 - '--" --- will go along with it. What can I say? MR. CARVIN-Because that brings it down to roughly about 50 peì"Cent relief. MR. MARESCO-So we'll go back seven feet instead of the five feet. MR. TURNER-Because, again, I agree with Fred, and the whole problem is not the sign. Part of the problem is the sign, where it's located now, because, naturally, you would drive up the road, if you were a stranger, and probably go right by it and say, there's the entrance there, but the entrance is back here. That's part of the problem. The sign's in the wrong place, no doubt about it. MR. MARESCO-I'd like to go along with the minimal relief, but I don't think, again, I agree with you. I don't think the sign is the main problem. It may help, and if it does. MR. TURNER-It may get them in there quicker. MR. MINARCHI-What would you say the main problem is? MR. MARESCO-There's many reasons, many reasons. MR. MINARCHI-Well, we know there's many reasons. reasons for anything in this life. There's many MR. MARESCO-You have the state of the economy. MR. TURNER-One of the biggest reasons, this last year, is the economy. That's the problem. MR. MINARCHI-Definitely. That is one of the reasons, okay. Give me another reason that we have some control over. MR. CARVIN-Color. MR. TURNER-Color maybe. MR. CARVIN-Your motel blends right into the whole area. MR. MARESCO-Also your location, now. Your area is now becoming, you know, it's more of a shopping area than a resort area now. MR. MINARCHI-It never was a resort area. MR. MARESCO-Yes, but there were more, you know, there was more motels and there was less. MR. MINARCHI-It was never a resort area. MR. MARESCO-Well, more than what it is. MR. MINARCHI-The only thing that we have is the Great Escape up the road, and that's a half a mile up there, and yet, at the same time, a half a mile, because there's no sidewalks, people can't walk. They still have to take a vehicle. So if I was a tourist here, and I wanted to go to the Great Escape, where would I stay? I'd stay at the Waikita. I'd stay at the Kay's. I would stay at Martha's. I could park and walk. I'm not a resort. All I am is, off the road, somebody comes along and see my place and says, I'm going to stay there. I'm going to go in and get a price. MR. MARESCO-I'm not against you. MR. MINARCHI-But if they don't see me, they're going to go by me. MR. MARESCO-I'm not against you at all. - 11 - -- ---' MR. MINARCHI-You know, Mr. Maresco, it's just like having the Howard Johnsons with their sign. Misleading, $39 dollars, in the Town of Queensbury. Do they pay taxes in the Town of Queensbury? No way do they pay anything for the Town of Queensbury. Yet they're taking bread out of IJ.1.'i. mouth, and I don't have time to go up there and play games, but they were legit in what they were doing, weren't they? But they were sneaky, in very small print, they had it in there, it was only good on certain, certain times, and then they, I called up on certain, certain times, and it was never available, because it was just to get you there, and then you as a tourist, once you get there, you're not going to go back to any place. It worked for them. Not for us, not in the Town of Queensbury. I pay ~ taxes in the Town of Queensbury. That's it. MR. TURNER-Okay. Lets move it. MR. FORD-I would be in favor of minimum relief. MR. TURNER-Yes, minimum. MR. MARESCO-So would I. MR. KARPELES-No. I'm opposed. MR. THOMAS-Seven feet. MR. TURNER-All right. MR. CARVIN-We'll just grant him eight feet of relief. MR. TURNER-Twenty-eight feet from that corner to that deck. It's 25 foot 6 from that corner to that corner. This thing comes out of here, this opens this all up. He's got some plantings here, and the swimming pool, and this kind of comes in. They've got to come in here like this. MR. CARVIN-So what are you saying? MR. TURNER-I'm just saying, he can go back there. MR. CARVIN-He can go back some more. Yes. MR. TURNER-Because the sign. He's got 22 and a half feet from there to there. With that gone, he's got 22 and a half feet from there to there, now, without the two foot on. He's got 28. MR. CARVIN-If this is to scale, how wide is that, five feet, six feet? MR. TURNER-Six feet. MR. CARVIN-Six feet. here? So what you're saying is this is six feet MR. TURNER-This is six feet right across the back. MR. CARVIN-Is that an accurate measurement, here, on this, six feet? MR. TURNER-The back of the old planter is six feet, scales out six feet in back of it. MR. MINARCHI-It's the width. MR. TURNER-This scales out five feet. This scales out four feet. You've got 25 feet 6 inches from there to there. You've got 28 feet from there to there. MR. CARVIN-This is to scale, is that correct? - 12 - '-- ' -- MR. MINARCHI-It should be. I tried, I was by myself when I did this. ~1R. CARVIN-O kay . MR. MINARCHI-I'm changing this planter here, also. MR. CARVIN-Okay. MR. MINARCHI-For flow. MR. CARVIN-Because he's going to go back in, depending on the width of the sign. If the sign is six feet long, and we put him seven, so now he's thirteen or fourteen back into here. I don't think we can make him go all the way back the full fifteen and then have the sign. MR. TURNER-But I'm just wondering, there's a pole right here. MR. MINARCHI-No. The pole is in front, right here. It's right on the road. In fact, the only thing that's between the pole and the road is a curb. MR. CARVIN-I mean, if he's willing to move this back, I think eight feet of relief is. MR. TURNER-See the line pole there and a pole you're off this way when the hill, you break the right in the way. of sight, the line of sight, there's a there. So you're coming up the hill, you come up the hill. When you come to top of the hill, you've got three poles MR. CARVIN-I still don't think it's going to be a factor, if we move it back two feet. MR. TURNER-No. I'm not saying it's a factor. I'm saying maybe it's too far forward. MR. MINARCHI-No. '(oad. You see, these poles are in the front on the MR. TURNER-I know they are. MR. CARVIN-See, what he's saying is this is the property line right here. So he's four foot into the roadway. MR. TURNER-Yes. That's what I'm saying. MR. CARVIN-But the pole is, obviously, even further, from the looks of it. MR. MINARCHI-The pole is only a foot away from the edge of this here, the planter. MR. CARVIN-That has always been !l!.i. problem coming up along here, I mean, is that this thing sticks way out. It's very obtrusive. MR. TURNER-Is this sign going, the entrance sign going to go? MR. MINARCHI-Yes. That's coming down. MR. MENTER-Are you just going to remove that? MR. MINARCHI-Yes. I'm going to put a small sign on the pilaster. MR. CARVIN-What are you thinking, Ted, move it back further, or are you comfortable with the eight feet of relief? MR. MINARCHI-The whole thing is so antiquated, and I have to do something drastic. - 13 - .",--, - MR. CARVIN-Are you comfortable? MR. TURNER-Yes. Okay. Lets move it. MOTION TO APPROVE SIGN VARIANCE NO. 40-1994 WILLIAM & ROSE MINARCHI, Introduced by Fred Carvin who moved for its adoption, seconded by Anthony Maresco: The applicant is requesting relief from Section 140-6 of the Sign Ordinance, which requires that freestanding signs be at least 15 feet from any property line. I would move that we grant the applicant eight feet of relief from this Section. The applicant has indicated a decline in business which he attributes to the poor location of his current sign. So, obviously, the benefit to the applicant, by moving the sign forward, would not be detrimental, in this particular instance, and would not cause any detriment to the community. The applicant has explored other feasible alternatives, and by the granting of this relief, it would be the minimum necessary relief to eliminate this particular difficulty. The sign as proposed is limited to 32 square feet. Duly adopted this 19th day of October, 1994, by the following vote: MR. TURNER-He's only going to have a 32 square foot sign. I think you ought to put that in the motion, in the resolution. MR. CARVIN-Okay. I'd like to just put an addendum on that. The new sign, as far as square footage, will conform to the current Town guidelines. MR. TURNER-What it should say is the sign as proposed is limited to 32 square feet. MR. CARVIN-I don't think you can do that, Ted. MR. TURNER-Yes, you can. Well, you've got a four by eight sign. That's what you're going to use, right? MR. CARVIN-Yes, but he can go up to 50 square feet. MR. TURNER-No, he can't. MR. MINARCHI-Right now, we can. I'm not sure what we're going to be doing. I know we want a gold leaf there. I don't know if it's going to be four by eight. I don't know if it's going to be four by six. I don't know if it's going to be six by two. I really don't, until we see, on paper, what it looks like, but it certainly isn't going to be as high as it is. MR. TURNER-No, no. I'm saying the sign is going to be 32 square feet in size. That's what you've got on your application. MR. MINARCHI-I do? MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. MINARCHI-What's the present sign right now? Isn't that 48, or am I wrong? No, that's not 48. That's about 32. MR. TURNER-You've got 32 square feet here, 11 foot height. Sign One, you've got nine foot by three and a half foot is thirty-two square feet. MR. MINARCHI-Then that's the existing one. MR. TURNER-That's the only two that you've got on here. MR. MINARCHI-Okay, then that's it. You're right. I wouldn't put - 14 - '-- ,-.-./ anything bigger than that. MR. TURNER-What I'm saying is you can have a 50 square foot sign at 15 foot back, and you can have a 64 square foot sign 25 foot back. So you're proposing a 32 square foot sign, at that distance. So that's what saying, it would be limited to that. MR. CARVIN-Okay. I'd also like to just note that Warren County turned this down and we need a majority plus one for approval, five votes for approval. AYES: Mr. Maresco, Mr. Ford, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Turner NOES: Mr. Karpeles ABSTAINED: Mr. Menter NEW BUSINESS: SIGN VARIANCE NO. 55-1994 TYPE: UNLISTED HC-1A PETER LAINES GLENS FALLS QUEEN DINER OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE UPPER GLEN STREET APPLICANT PROPOSES TO INSTALL A ROOF SIGN MEASURING SIX (6) SQUARE FEET, IN ADDITION TO EXISTING SIGNAGE. SECTION 140-6 ALLOWS ONE WALL SIGN AND ONE FREESTANDING SIGN, SO APPLICANT SEEKS RELIEF FROM THIS SECTION. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) 10/12/94 TAX MAP NO. 71-1-3 LOT SIZE: N/A SECTION 140-6 KARL BRENNEISEN, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TURNER-We've got a problem with your sign. We're going to Tead this letter from Gibralter Realty. MR. BRENNEISEN-I was just notified of that today, when I was doing some work on the Diner on the neon I was putting up up there. The only thing we were looking to get is we were looking to install that sign in lieu of a pylon sign out by the road, and the only thing is, Peter was supposed to notify the property owners, because I have no way to contact them, Peter Laines. I Just found that out today, that they sent some kind of letter saying that they were opposed to it. I think the reason they said that was because Peter did not notify them that he was doing anything like that, like putting another sign up. He was supposed to take care of that. MR. TURNER-We can't entertain it, though, until we get their permission. MR. BRENNEISEN-Okay. Is there any way, that's why I'm here. MR. TURNER-Do you want to table it? MR. BRENNEISEN-Table it until next time, or whenever. MR. TURNER-You've got 60 days. We'll table it for 60 days. MR. BRENNEISEN-I'll get the number from here, who I need to talk to. I'll explain what's going on. The owner of the Diner is Greek, and he has a little trouble understanding, and explaining to him, sometimes. So if I get a hold of the gentleman's number, I'll get in touch with him. MR. TURNER-Yes. Okay. So I'll move to table. MOTION TO TABLE SIGN VARIANCE NO. 55-1994 PETER LAINES GLENS FALLS QUEEN DINER, Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Fred Carvin: Until the issue that's been brought up by the owner of the property and the tenant has been resolved to their satisfaction. - 15 - ~ -- Duly adopted this 19th day of October, 1994, by the following vote: MR. TURNER-And if it isn't resolved, if they say he can't have it, then we won't hear it. MR. BRENNEISEN-Okay. AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Maresco, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE MR. TURNER-Okay. It's tabled for 60 days, and if you can't do anything in the 60 days, in that tIme frame, get a letter to the Planning Department, and we'll entertain whether we want to extend it for another 60 days, or 30 days, whatever. MR. BRENNEISEN-I'll get it in touch. Thank you. MR. TURNER-All right. Thank you. AREA VARIANCE NO. 56-1994 TYPE II SFR-1A RICHARD ROUSE OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE 45 GLENWOOD AVENUE APPLICANT PROPOSES AN ADDITION TO EXISTING GARAGE, WITH SETBACK RANGING FROM THREE (3) TO SIX (6) FEET, INSTEAD OF THE TWENTY (20) FOOT SETBACK REQUIRED BY SECTION 179-20C. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) 10/12/94 TAX MAP NO. 105-1-35 LOT SIZE: 0.46 ACRES SECTION 179-20 RICHARD ROUSE, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 56-1994, Richard Rouse, Meeting Date: October 19, 1994 "APPLICANT: Richard Rouse PROJECT LOCATION: 45 Glenwood Avenue PROPOSED ACTION: Applicant proposes an addition to an existing 14 ft. by 20 ft. attached garage. CONFORMANCE WITH ORDINANCE: Applicant proposes a side setback ranging from 3 feet at the rear of the garage, to 6 feet at the front. Section 179-20 requires a setback of 20 feet, so applicant seeks relief of 17 feet at the rear and 14 feet at the front. REASON FOR VARIANCE REQUEST, AND BENEFIT TO APPLICANT: The applicant would like to store two vehicles under cover, and cannot do this in the existing garage. FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES: It would not be po~sible to add to this garage without a variance, since it is already nonconforming. A slightly smaller garage, e.g. 22 feet wide, would reduce the amount of the variance, but not significantly. IS THIS RELIEF SUBSTANTIAL RELATIVE TO THE ORDINANCE? It appears substantial relative to the required 20 foot setback, but not relative to the existing setback range of 5 rear and 11 front. EFFECTS ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMUNITY: There have been no negative comments as of this writing. A letter from the adjacent neighbor, Mr. Howard Beaty, states that he has no objection to the project. IS THIS DIFFICULTY SELF-CREATED?: The difficulty seems to lie with the fact that the house and garage pre-date the Zoning Ordinance. PARCEL HISTORY: The lot size is 0.40 acres. The house was built in 1950. STAFF COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: No further comment. SEQR: Type II, no further action required." MR. THOMAS-"At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board held on the 12th day of October, 1994, the above application for an Area Variance to construct an addition to the garage was reviewed and the following action taken: Recommendation to: Approve" Signed by Thomas Haley, Chairperson MR. TURNER-Okay. Mr. Rouse. everybody look at it? Any questions anyone? Did MR. CARVIN-I just have one question. I just want to make sure. - 16 - "'-- -./ Mr. Beaty is the neighbor to the north? MR. ROUSE-Yes. MR. FORD-I have a question. I believe as you add on on that north side, that's where the addition would be, right, toward the Beatys? MR. ROUSE-Right. MR. FORD-It would require a lot of fill, and if you use the same design that's there currently, is there any concern about the drainage of water toward the Beatys? Was that discussed with them? MR. ROUSE-Yes, and drainage toward them. with that. the way the land slopes right now there's They (lost word) wouldn't have any problem MR. FORD-It's just going to be closer, though? MR. ROUSE-Yes. MR. TURNER-Okay~ Anyone else? hearing. Okay. I'll now open the public PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED CORRESPONDENCE MR. THOMAS-One letter, dated September 14, 1994, to the Town of Queensbury, "N. Harwood Beaty and Nancy S. Beaty, residing at 47 Glenwood Avenue in the Town of Queensbur)1 do no object to the three foot side line setback of the proposed two car garage owned by Mr. and Mrs. Richard Rouse of 45 Glenwood Avenue, Town of Queensbury" Signed N. Harwood Beaty and Nancy S. Beaty. MR. TURNER-Okay. No further discussion? Motion's in order. MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 56-1994 RICHARD· ROUSE, Introduced by Fred Carvin who moved for its adoption, seconded by Theodore TU1" ner : The applicant is proposing an addition to an existing 14' by 20' attached garage and is seeking relief from Section 179-20, which requires a side setback of 20 feet. The applicant is seeking relief of 17 feet at the rear and 14 feet at the front from this particular Section. Because of the current configuration of the house and garage, which pre-date the Zoning Ordinance, any expansion of the garage would require relief from this particular Section. So it is obvious that this is not a self-created situation. The benefit to the applicant would be that it would allow him to store two vehicles under cover, and by the granting of this particular variance, there would be no detrimental effect to the community, or have any detrimental effect on the neighborhood. Although this relief appears to be substantial in relation to the Ordinance, there are no other feasible alternatives. Duly adopted this 19th day of October, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Maresco, Mr. Ford, Mr. Turner t·"OES: ¡\lONE - 17 - ~ AREA VARIANCE NO. 57-1994 TYPE: UNLISTED RR-3A KATHLEEN MARTINEZ, ET ALL JOANNE GAVIN OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE RIDGE ROAD, 1 MILE NORTH OF HARRISENA CHURCH ON LEFT SIDE. APPLICANTS PROPOSE TO TRANSFER 0.85 ACRES FROM THEIR PRE-EXISTING, NONCONFORMING 2.26 ACRE LOT TO THEIR NEIGHBOR, A PRE-EXISTING NONCONFORMING 0.44 ACRE LOT, AND SEEKS RELIEF FROM THE LOT WIDTH AND LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 179-30 AND 179-15. (ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY) (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) 10/12/94 TAX MAP NO. 27-1-7.3 LOT SIZE: 2.29 ACRES SECTION 179-15, 179-30 JOANNE GAVIN, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 57-1994, Kathleen Martinez, Et All Joanne Gavin, Meeting Date: October 19, 1994 "APPLICANT: Kathleen Maì-tinez, Et All, Joanne Gavin PROJECT LOCATION: Ridge Road, 1 mile north of Harrisena Church on left PROPOSED ACTION: Applicant proposes to transfer a 0.85 acres from their pre- existing, nonconforming, 2.26 acre lot to their neighbor, a pre- existing, nonconforming 0.44 acre lot. CONFORMANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE: Section 179-15 requires lot size of 3 acres and average lot width of 200 feet. Section 179-30 states that lots on local arterial roads require double the average lot width. Ridge Road is listed as a local arterial road. REASON FOR VARIANCE REQUEST, AND BENEFIT TO APPLICANT: Applicant states that they intend to sell their property, and that the neighbor had asked that if they ever decide to sell, they consider selling some of their acreage to the neighbor. The applicant would receive a financial benefit, as well. FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES: The division of land as proposed seems to make the most sense, from a topographic point of view. One proposed lot sits higher than the other, and is divided from the other by a stone wall. IS THIS RELIEF SUBSTANTIAL RELATIVE TO THE ORDINANCE? The resulting lots would be 1.41 acres and 1.29 acres. This brings one down to half the required size, and one up to nearly half the required size. EFFECTS ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMUNITY: It does not appear that there would be any adverse effects on the community. No additional houses would be built, or driveways needed. IS THIS DIFFICULTY SELF-CREATED?: This difficulty appears to be related to a desire to create a more useable piece of land for the owner of the 0.44 acre, pre-existing lot. PARCEL HISTORY: The existing house was constructed in 1985. Both lots pre-exist current zoning. STAFF COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: No further comment. SEQR: Unlisted action. Short Form EAF must be reviewed." MR. THOMAS-"At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board held on the 12th day of October, 1994, the above application for an Area Variance to reduce the existing nonconforming lot from 2.29 acres in size to 1.44 acres in size, for the purpose of sale to the neighboring property owner was reviewed and the following action taken: Recommendation to: Approve Comments: With the condition that the parcel that is being conveyed not have any structure built on it." Signed by Thomas Haley, Chairperson. MR. TURNER-Okay. MS. GAVIN-I'm Joanne Gavin. MR. TURNER-Okay. Would you care to add anything to the statements that have been read? MS. GAVIN-The only thing that, Alice Bruins is here. She's the neighbor, and the only thing that she wants us to check on is if we want to sell, they really want to buy it. They have, if you look at the drawing, they have two existing buildings, other than their house, and they're both old barns, and one is an old garage, and what they'd like to, eventually, do with the property, knowing that they would need a variance for that, too - 18 - '-" -- is they'd like to destrqy those and construct a new garage, and I just thought that would be something that you would need to knov·J. MR. TURNER-Did you go to Warren County? MS. GAVIN-Yes. MR. TURNER-You did. I don't understand their comment. I understand their comment, but I mean, it doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense to say that you can't build on it. MS. GAVIN-With all their stuff, if you look at the drawing now, their house and their two out buildings, they're really squished together, and the two out buildings are fairly old. MR. CARVIN-Okay. Will these two lots be combined by deed? In other words~ will they? MR. TURNER-It would be one deed. MR. MARTIN-Yes. That's the thing to bear in mind, here, that we're beginning with two lots and we're ending up with two lots. They're not creating a third lot or anything like that. MS. GAVIN-No. MR. MARTIN-It's really just a, it's a boundary line adjustment, and what kicks the need for the variance is that you're increasing the nonconformity with one of the lots, technically, but the other thing is, you ',"e dec,"easing the nonconformity with the other one. Both lots are nonconforming, MR. TURNER-Yes. So you're not really changing anything, just the bou nda,"y 1 i ne . MS. CIPPERLY-So as far as their existing garages an barns, they could take those down and if they had this additional land, they would just have to meet the setbacks for the new property. MR. TURNER-That's all. MR. MENTER-How is it that the County Planning put the condition on it that no structure be built on that piece of property? MR. TURNER-That's what I'm saying. It doesn't make sense to me. That's crazy. MR. MENTER-If you look at the approval from the Planning Board, County Board, the comment is that "With the condition that the parcel that is being conveyed not have any structure built on it. II MR. MARTIN-The only thing I can think is that maybe they thought that it was going to be a third lot. MR. MENTER-For a home, right. MR. MARTIN-That's the only thing I can think of. MR. FORD-Was that a point of discussion with the Warren County Planning Board? MS. GAVIN-No, because I guess when we had listened to them, we had understood it as being a home would be built on it, but we already knew they weren't going to build a home on it. They already have their home there. MR. TURNER-That's right. MS. GAVIN-So that's sort of how we thought when they said it. We - 19 - '",,-- --- just figured that was fine since they weren't going to build a home, but I don't want to sell her a piece of property if she can't build a garage on it, which is what they want to do, and have them waste their money. MR. TURNER-No. It says that the piece that's being conveyed can't be built on. You couldn't build on it anyway. If you made it, like Jim says, three lots, you couldn't build on it anyway. MS. GAVIN-It's way too small. Yes. MR. TURNER-Okay. All right. I don't have a problem with this. It's just a transfer, boundary line adjustment, really. No problem at all. Lets open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TURNER-No further discussion? MR. MARESCO-It's going to be one lot. MR. TURNER-That's all. They're both going to nonconforming now and they're going to always be because the acreage isn't there. Okay. Motion's think it's pretty straightforward, pretty simple. be, they're nonconforming in or der . I MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 57-1994 KATHLEEN MARTINEZ, ET ALL JOANNE GAVIN, Introduced by Fred Carvin who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Ford: The applicant is proposing to transfer .85 acres from their preexisting, nonconforming 2.29 acre lot to their neighbor who has also a preexisting, nonconforming .44 acre lot. In order for the applicant to proceed with this proposal, they would need relief from Section 179-15, which requires lot size of three acres, ~ndan average lot width of 200 feet, and Section 179-30, which states that lots on local arterial roads require double the average lot width. Ridge Road is listed as a current arterial road. The benefit to the applicant is that they would be able to sell this particular piece of property to their neighbor who has consistently requested that they sell it to them, and by the transfer of this particular parcel, there would be no adverse effect to the community. If anything, the resulting two lots would bring the two lots closer to compliance with the current Ordinance, because one resulting lot would be 1.44 acres and the other would be 1.29 acres. There would not be any adverse effect on the community or neighborhood by granting this variance, and that this difficulty is not self-created, because both lots preexist the current Zoning Ordinance. The Gavin house was constructed in 1985. The Short EAF shows no negative impact. The Warren County Planning Board has conditioned their approval with a suggestion that there would not be any structures built on the lot, which is inconsistent with Planning and Zoning Boards. So it is suggested that if in the future the owner decides to build additional structures, that they apply to the appropriate Planning and Zoning agencies in the Town of Queensbury for approval, if needed. Duly adopted this 19th day of October, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Maresco, Mr. Ford, Mr. Mente)-, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE - 20 - ------. ~ AREA VARIANCE NO. 58-1994 WR-1A/CEA TYPE: II ALBERT F. CHANESE OWNER: ALBERT F. CHANESE & MARTHA M. CHANESE EASTERLY SIDE OF CLEVERDALE ROAD ABOUT 5 HOMES NORTH OF ROCKHURST ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO DEMOLISH EXISTING STRUCTURES AND CONSTRUCT A NEW HOUSE AND GARAGE. SETBACK RELIEF WILL BE NEEDED FROM THE SHORELINE SETBACKS OF SECTION 179-60. RELIEF IS ALSO SOUGHT FROM THE SIDEYARD SETBACKS REQUIRED IN SECTION 179-16, FOR BOTH THE HOUSE AND GARAGE. (ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY) (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) 10/12/94 TAX MAP NO. 13-3-28 LOT SIZE: 0.24 ACRES SECTION 179--16C CHARLES SCUDDER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 58~1994, Albert F. Chanese, Meeting Date: October 19,1994 "APPLICANT: Albert.F. Chanese PROJECT LOCATION: easterly side of Cleverdale Road, about 5 homes north of Rockhurst Road PROPOSED ACTION: Applicant proposes to demolish existing structures and construct a new house and garage. CONFORMANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE?: Section 179- 60 requires a shoreline setback of 75 feet. Applicant proposes 53 feet, so seeks relief of 22 feet. Section 179-16 requires a total of 50 feet for side setbacks, with a minimum of 20 feet on one side. Applicant proposes a side setback of 1 foot for the garage, so seeks relief of 19 feet. Applicant proposes a side setbacks of 19.9 feet on the south side, and 10 feet on the north side, for a total of 29.9 feet. Relief of 10 feet is needed on the north side, and relief of 20.1 feet is needed from the total. REASON FOR VARIANCE REQUEST AND BENEFIT TO APPLICANT: Applicant wishes to demolish the existing house and garage, and construct two new structures. FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES: If the garage were replaced as is, no relief would be needed, although if it is moved, the existing nonconformity of the rear setback is decreased. IS THIS RELIEF SUBSTANTIAL RELATIVE TO THE ORDINANCE?: The relief of 19 feet for the garage seems substantial. The north side setback relief sought is 50%, the relief sought from the total is 40%. The shoreline setback relief sought is 29%. EFFECTS ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMUNITY: No comment has been received to date. It appears that moving the garage forward and enlarging it may adversely effect the neighbor to the north, where there appears to be a porch on the front of the garage. This neighbor is also the most likely to be affected by the 10 foot setback proposed for the house. The shoreline setback is actually an improvement over the existing situation, where the setback is 43.5 feet. This plan also replaces the existing outdated septic system with a new one, further from the lake. IS THIS DIFFICULTY SELF-CREATED?: The size of the lot and its limitations regarding placement of a house and septic system seem to be the difficulty. PARCEL HISTORY: According to the Assessor's records, the original structure existed on this property, and the current structure was constructed in 1940. The parcel size is 0.25 acres. STAFF COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: No further comment. SEQR: Type I I, no fUì'theì· action. II MR. THOMAS-"At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board held on the 12th day of October, 1994, the above application for an Area Variance to raze old wood frame house and garage; build new house and garage, was reviewed, and the following action was taken. Recommendation to: Approve Comments: Due to the fact that it will not be as close to the lake, the side yard setbacks will be the same and there will be an improved system for waste water. II Signed by Thomas Haley, Chaiì'person MR. TURNER-Mr. Scudder. MR. SCUDDER-Thank you, Mr. Chairman. client, Albert F. Chanese, and, Mr. take your questions. I'd like to introduce my Chairman, we're prepared to - 21 - '-- ~ MR. TURNER-Okay. Lets see if we can fire some at you. Has anybody got any, for starters? MR. KARPELES-Yes. You say the impervious area is going to be the same after as it is before, is this going to be paved ahead of the garage? I mean, you're moving the garage back? ALBERT CHANESE MR. CHANESE-No. It would be a crushed stone. We may go with a macadam. We haven't decided. MR. KARPELES-So that would increase the impervious area, right? ~1R. TURNER-Yes. MR. KARPELES-And it also looks like, you say, how about the square footage of the new as opposed to the old? It looks to me like the new is appreciable bigger than the old. MR. CHANESE-The old house was 1440 square feet. The new proposed house is (lost word) is just under 2,000 square feet. MR. KARPELES-So that also increases the impervious area, right? MS. CIPPERLY-The first floor on the new house is 990, is what you told me today. The second floor is 921. MR. TURNER-990, the second floor is 920? MS. CIPPERLY-Yes, for a total of 1911. The original house was 1520. MR. MENTER-But 1520 up and down. MS. CIPPERLY-Total. I was asking this in reference to whether it was a 50 percent expansion or not, and it isn't. MR. KARPELES-Yes, but how about the square footage of the impervious area, the footprint of it? MS. CIPPERLY-I see what you mean. MR. SCUDDER-Well, planned, that the little bit larger. the footprint, footp)- i nt area it's obvious, from of the new house will we've be a MR. KARPELES-Well, I just ~Janted to clarify this, because it says that there's no appreciable change in the impervious area. "There will be no significant change in the post development ratio". Now is that true or isn't it true? MR. SCUDDER-Well, there's a qualifer there, that word "significant". There will be a change. Whether it's significant or not it a judgement. MR. KARPELES-Well, if you don't know what it is, you don't know whether it's significant or not. MR. SCUDDER-Right. I appreciate that. MR. KARPELES-How about this lawn area, off street parking. Is that going to remain lawn area? MR. CHANESE-It will definitely be lawn area. MR. SCUDDER-We are prepared to stipulate that the space in front of the garage could be lawn area, too, if that's necessary. MR. MARTIN-Charlie, you're saying the impermeable area is 17 - 22 - "----' -.-/ percent, according to your chart here, on your plan? MR. CARVIN-According to the chart, it looks like 17 percent. MR. TURNER-Your chart, here, on Waterfront Residential zoning requirement, look at your chart that you've got listed at the top, minimum setbacks, Ordinance and requested. MR. MARTIN-I interpret that to say that you're saying that the house, garage, and deck constitute 17 percent of the site? MR. SCUDDER-That's what we're saying. That's correct. MR. KARPELES-That's correct that that's what you're saying, or that's correct that that's what the answer is? MR. SCUDDER-Well, I hope the answer is both, yes for both of those. It would only take a minute to calculate. MR. KARPELES-Well, I just think it ought to be corrected. I just want to clarify it, that's all. MR. SCUDDER-Right. MR. KARPELES-I mean, it's a thing that just grabs me when I look at it, that I don't see how it can be the same as it was before. MR. SCUDDER-No. It's not exactly, we don't assert that. MR. KARPELES-But if it's not the same, I'd like to know how much the difference is. I'1R . SCUDDER- ,.Jell, we can give you that. It L-Ji II just take a couple of minutes. 1'1R. TURNER-Okay. Go ahead and do it. MR. SCUDDER-·Could we hold that question in abeyance for a moment? MR. TURNER-Yes, we can. Okay. So you're going to have an apron on the garage, the proposed new garage. The lawn area, off street parking, that's going to remain as is? Is that correct? MR. SCUDDER-Yes, it is. That's intended to have a 20 foot strip right across the front of the lot, or the back of the lot, however you define it, next to the road, so that cars can just pull in and park across there, as may be necessary. When I filled out these papers, it was not my thought that there would be any paving in front of the garage, and Mr. Chanese is prepared to stipulate that he'll forego the paving. MR. MARTIN-Why would that be? MS. CIPPERLY-If it affects the permeability. MR. MARTIN-Well, even if it's a gravel driveway, the standard intepretation has been that that's impervious area as well. So there's nothing gained there, really. MR. SCUDDER-No. I'm saying he's prepared to leave it as lawn. MR. CHANESE-Just leave it as lawn. MR. SCUDDER-Which is what it is now. MR. MARTIN-Okay. MR. CARVIN-The proposed new garage, is it going to be one story, or is there going to be two? - 23 - '---' --.-/ MR. CHANESE-One story. MR. CARVIN-Just one story. MR. CHANESE-No. MR. TURNER-Pitched roof? There's no loft or anything? MR. CHANESE-It would be a gabled roof. Basically, what's there now (lost word). MR. SCUDDER-Mr. Chairman, has everybody had a chance to look at the property? MR. TURNER-Yes sir. I did. I looked at it, and it looks mighty small. MR. CARVIN-Why are you moving the garage forward? Let me ask you that. MR. CHANESE-Just so we could park them in the garage. MR. CARVIN-Basically. adequate? The 11 and a half feet right now is not MR. CHANESE-Not enough to (lost word). MR. CARVIN-How far are you moving that forward. I don't see that anywhere. I don't understand what the actual measurement would be. MR. MARTIN-That permeability is correct, from what 1 can see. I came up with a total of 1689 square feet over the garage, house, porch and deck, and there's probably a little bit more with a driveway and sidewalk, and so on, and the overall lot size is 10,256. You divide that out, it comes out to 16.4 percent, and that's including the driveways and sidewalk, it probably is right about seven to eight percent. MR. FORD-Going back to the setback on the garage, on the first set of plans we have, it shows that it's 11.5 feet back to the existing garage, and on the proposed garage it's also 11.5, the second page? MR. SCUDDER-Mr. Ford, are you refering to the existing plot plan? MR. FORD-Existing. I'm sorry. You're right. MR. MARTIN-Charlie, would the applicant be proposing or interested in providing an accurate stormwater management, in other words, gutters and downspouts and that type of thing, subsurface disposal, even if, you know, some eave trenches or infiltration, that type of thing? MR. SCUDDER-Sure, yes. MR. MARTIN-We're trying to incorporate that into the new construction on the lakeshore. MR. SCUDDER-We can do that. Obviously, all drains to the lake, but there's no reason can't be collected and put in the ground. the surface water why the roof water MR. MARTIN-That's what I'm saying, and just so you're aware that the first 35 feet back from the shoreline is total no disturb area, during construction. MR. SCUDDER-Clost word) overlay? MR. MARTIN-Yes. That's a totally restricted area, no removal of - 24 - "'-" ----' vegetation of any kind. I haven't seen the site. This is my standard pitch, in other words. MR. SCUDDER-Well, I'm familiar with that requirement, and as the site exists, it's just lawn right to the sea wall. MR. MARTIN-Okay. All right. MR. SCUDDER-At the present time. planted or shrubbery? I assume that trees could be MR. MARTIN-Yes. That's encouraged. MR. SCUDDER-But if they're there, they can't be cut down. MR. MARTIN-Exactly. Then the last thing temporary erosion control measures during fences, hay bales, so on and so forth. is presence of a construction, silt MR. SCUDDER-Pursuant to the New York State Guidelines. MR. MARTIN-Right, exactly. MR. TURNER-Okay. Anyone else got any questions? open the public hearing. Okay. I'll PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED CORRESPONDENCE MR. THOMAS-The Engineering Report from Scudder Associates, dated September 15, 1994, "CHANESE PARCEL DESCRIPTION: Located on the easterly side of Cleverdale Road with 60 foot frontage on Lake George, the lands of Albert and Martha Chanese were acquired from the family of Martha (Jansen) in 1991 and comprise 0.24 acres. Boundary and topographic surveys were completed by this office in July, 1994. At present an old wood frame house and garage stand on the lot. Mr. and Mrs. Chanese intend to raze the old buildings and build a new house. Paul Cushing, Architect, a nearby neighbor, has been commissioned to design the new home, whose footprint is 26'-8" x 36'-0", or 960 square feet, excluding a porch and deck. The nearly rectangular lot has a depth from road to lake shore of 174 feet. The ground surface slope is about 5.8% making the elevation difference 10 feet from road to seawall. The lake surface is just a foot below grade at the wall. There are no wetlands on or near the Chanese lot. SOILS & SUB GRADE Abundant excavation experience in the vicinity of the Chanese lot shows that poorly-drained soils exist to a depth of at least eight feet without evidence of bedrock. Our hand-dug excavations show there is no groundwater, or evidence of seasonal high groundwater, within the first three feet below grade. Precolation tests that we conducted according to the NYSDOH method yielded a stabilized result of 1" drop in 20 minutes. We know from experience that this rate is rather typical for the neighborhood of the Chanese lot, and indeed much of the land along the lake shore. ZONING The Chanese lot is in a WR-1A Zone making it a preexisting and nonconforming parcel under current zoning regulations. Area variances will be required. We believe that proposed improvements will be environmentally beneficial to the community. For example, the new home will be set back farther from the lake, and existing cesspools will be removed in favor of a new wastewater system as described below. WATER SUPPLY Water will be supplied from an intake in Lake George. A pump and pressure tank will be located in the house. There is no treatment required for individual private consumers, but we recommend that surface waters be disinfected for domestic use. - 25 - --- ---- WASTE WATER DISPOSAL The existing cesspools on the Chanese property will be replaced with an adequate septic tank and mound absorption system situated as far as practicable from the lake shore. A lift station will be necessary for dosing the mound distribution system. The mound will be sited at the upland end of the lot. The design standards of NYSDOH (NYCRR, Title 10, Chapter 11, Appendix 75-A9(c) govern the detailing of the mound system. The elements of the new wastewater system include a 1250-gallon septic tank, 750-gallon lift station chamber, force main and mound absorption system. BASIS OF DESIGN The new home will have modern water-saving plumbing fixtures. Table 1 of the above standards allows a design flow of 90 GPD per bedroom when water-saving toilets are installed, or 130 GPD with new standard fixtures. The new Chanese home will have three bedrooms and a den that can accommodate a guest. SYSTEM DETAILS The design daily discharge is 520 GPD. The basal area of the mound is based on an aborption rate of 0.7 GPD/SF in the in situ soils. The aborption bed area is based on a mound application rate of 1.2 GPD/SF. The mound will be charged approximately four times per day at design flow (which will not occur often) by pumping settled effluent to a pressure distribution system in the mound. A manometer is shown on the drawings which allows venting and the means to exactly control pressure head in the distribution system which should be approximately 2.5 feet of water. Crushed rock (ASTM # 67) serves to spread the effluent across the full area of the bed for uniform application to the filtering soils. Working drawings have been prepared with specifications on construction, materials and equipment for proposed new wastewater disposal system to serve the Chanese residence. PLOT PLAN The locations of existing houses and garages on the Chanese lot and the adjacent sites are shown on the Plot Plan, Sheet 2 of the drawings. Setback dimensions are shown to augment those shown on the Site Plan, Sheet 1. The three existing homes are all at approximately the same setback distance from Lake George. GRADING & STORMWATER MANAGEMENT The impervious area of the Chanese lot is currently about 17%. There will be no significant percentage change in the Post-Development ratio. Excepting only roof areas, the lot is covered with lawn, and will be after the new house is built. The stormwater runoff quantities will not increase; indeed there may be a slight reduction due to the limited grading anticipated. The grade on the lower portion of the lot will be raised about one foot to match finished grade on the adjoining parcels. Finished grade contours, after completion of the project will generally run parallel to the lake shore across the Chanese lot and those of its neighbors. FIRE PROTECTION Inasmuch as there is no public system on Clever dale, and no hydrants, fire protection is afforded by the North Queensbury Fire Department. The new fire house is sited on Route 9L near Cleverdale Road, about one mile from the Chanese parcel. PARKING As a rule, there will be parking spaces needed for one or two cars. In other situations, there will be space across the front of the lot for some 4 or 5 cars. ELECTRICAL UTILITIES The accompanying map of a survey of the Chanese lot shows the location of existing overhead wires. At this time we do not know whether the electrical service will remain overhead or go underground to the new house. SCUDDER Associates Engineers, Surveyors & Planners Charles H. Scudder, P.E. Principal" MR. TURNER-Okay. Any further questions after that? MR. CARVIN-I just have a couple of questions. II No been received to date. It appears moving the garage enlarging it may adversely effect the neighbors to Do you know if they're still around? comment has forward and the north." MR. CHANESE-They live in Chicago, and I did speak with them (lost word). I'm, basically, moving it back even with their garage. MR. CARVIN-Okay. You mean moving it forward? - 26 - '-' -.-/ MR. TURNER-Toward the road. MR. CARVIN-No. He's moving it forward toward the lake. MR. CHANESE-I'm moving it back away from the road. MR. MENTER-He's moving it toward the lake. MR. MARESCO-Will that be obst ,"uct i ng any view that they may ha\le, any lake view or anything? MR. SCUDDER-If you would look at the plot plan, on Page Two, as far as the relationship of the Chaneses' buildings to their neighbors buildings~ the existing plot plan, and what we're proposing is to move the garages back so (lost word) they would all have the same back. It would be setback from the road. MS. CIPPERLY-The garage to the the front of their garage, or is north, is that a porch there on it just windows? MR. CHANESE-Just windows. MS. CIPPERLY-Okay. MR. SCUDDER-When I first looked at it, I thought it was a cottage, because I was looking at it from the lake. Well, I went over there and did a little snooping, and it's not. MR. CARVIN-Okay. So what you're saying is there should be no adverse effect on the neighbors, then? MR. CHANESE-No. That's correct. MR. TURNER-All right. Is everybody satisfied? questions? Motion's in order, then. t"o further MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 58-1994 ALBERT F. CHANESE, Introduced by Fred Carvin who moved for its adoption, seconded by Theodore Turner: The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing structures and construct a new house and garage. In order for the applicant to move forward with this proposal, he is seeking relief from Section 179-60, which requires a shoreline setback of 75 feet, and the applicant is seeking 22 feet of relief from this Section. The applicant is also seeking relief from Section 179-16, which requires a total of 50 feet for side setbacks, with a minimum of 20 feet on one side. The applicant is seeking relief of 19 feet from this particular Section. The applicant is proposing a side setback of 19.9 feet on the south side and 10 feet on the north side, for a total of 29.9 feet. Relief of 10 feet is needed on the north side, and relief of 20.1 feet is needed from the total. The benefit to the applicant would be that he would be able to replace a structure that was constructed in 1940. He would be able to upgrade the septic and sewer systems into conformance with current standards, and he actually is moving the house back away from the lake, which certainly would be a positive to the neighborhood and community, and by the granting of this area variance, there would be no detrimental effect on the neighborhood or community. The relief does appear to be substantial, as far as the garage is concerned. However, because of the nonconforming nature of the lot and the actual configuration of the lot, there are no other feasible alternatives. There's been no public opposition or comment regarding this particular application, and this particular difficulty is not self-created, because of the size of the lot and limitations regarding the placement of the house and septic system on the lot. No further action is required by SECRA as this is a Type II Action. - 27 - ',--, --' Duly adopted this 19th day of October, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Maresco, Mr. Ford, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE NOTICE OF APPEAL NO. 4-94 MARGARET E. BLEIBTREY APPEAL BY MARGARET E. BLEIBTREY FROM A DECISION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR STATING THAT A FISHING GUIDE SERVICE INCIDENTAL TO THE PERMITTED BED AND BREAKFAST WOULD BE AN ALLOWED USE UNDER SECTION 179-13, LAND CONSERVATION ZONES. ACCORDINGLY, AN INTERPRETATION BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS IS REQUESTED. PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON UPPER RIDGE ROAD, TAX MAP NO. 20-1-2 MARGARET BLEIBTREY, PRESENT MR. THOMAS-"Dear Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: Mr. Martin's letter dated July 11, 1994 (copy attached) to the Lake George Park Commission regarding Michael DiPalma's application for a Class A Marina at his dock states that Mr. Martin finds no violation of the Town Zoning Code in the operation of a fishing charter business by Mr. DiPalma at this site. He also states that this business has been in operation since 1984. Mr. DiPalma also states that he has been operating this fishing business since 1984. (See attached copies of Planning Board - Site Plan Review minutes from January 25, 1994.) A charter fishing business is not an allowed use in the current town zoning, nor was it an allowed use under the previous zoning code of 1982. Therefore, this business was illegal at the time it started. A use which was illegal at the time it began has no vested rights and thus, cannot be considered 'grandfathered'. Attached also is a copy of the 1987 notice of violation issued to Mr. DiPalma by the Town of Queensbury for operation of a fishing charter business at this site. This verifies the fact that his business was definitely a zoning violation at that time. The Zoning Administrator has already rescinded his original statement that a Class A Marina at this site would not violate the Town Zoning Code by virtue of his letter dated July 21, 1994 to the Lake George Park Commission. He states correctly in that letter that a commercial marina is NOT an allowed use in this zone. Since the Zoning Administrator also concurred with the use of this site for a charter fishing business in his original letter to the Lake George Park Commission, and since the fishing charter business is also a violation of the Town Zoning Code, a letter rescinding his original determination regarding this use is necessary to clarify the Town's position. According to the Zoning Code, neither a Class A marina nor a fishing charter business is allowed in this zone. Both of these facts should be made clear to the Park Commission and Mr. DiPalma. Thank you for your consideration. Margaret Bleibtrey" A letter dated July 11, 1994, to Mike White, Lake George Park Commission, "Dear Mr. White: I am in receipt of a Notice of Meeting regarding the Class A Marina Permit for Mike DiPalma. This property has received an Area Variance from the Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals for expansion of the principle structure and a Site Plan Review approval from the Town Planning Board for establishment of a bed and breakfast on the parcel. It is my understanding that this Class A Marina Permit would allow for incidental guide fishing for guests of the bed and breakfast. During the Town's deliberations of the above referenced actions, it was established that the fishing guide business has been actively in existence on this site since 1984. Providing that the fishing guide service is incidental to the bed and breakfast and that there will be no boat slips for rent with the approval of this permit, I do not find any violations of the Town Zoning Code. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Dept. of Community Development James M. Martin" And also attached, an Order to Remedy Violation, dated August 25, 1987, to Michael DiPalma. "Please take notice there exists a - 28 - .,- '---" violation of Zoning Ordinances at the premises hereafter described and that operating a business, a fishing charter, from an LC-42 zone, a violation of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance Section 4.040 Paragraph C." Signed by Bert Martin. MR. TURNER-Okay. Mrs. Bleibtrey. MRS. BLEIBTREY-Margaret Bleibtrey. My point in filing the appeal is only that there appears to be some condoning of land uses which are not allowed in LC-42A, particularly on the 10 foot right-of-way through my property, which is why I'm ultimately concerned about it. If I understand the Zoning Administrator's tho~ghts on the matter, he believes that business, .the fishing charter business, is grandfathered. In the January 25th minutes of the Planning Board meeting, it was stated that the business didn't start until 1984. 50 that argument doesn't really fly, and in looking at all of the Zoning Regulations, '88 and '82, I could find nothing that allows a fishing business. Our area is all residential, and in the January 25th meeting, I asked Mr. Martin if a fishing charter business was allowed in an LC-42A and he said, no, it is not, and I have a copy of that. Also, I wanted to say that the bed and breakfast that was permitted actually shouldn't have been permitted either, but that's not the point here, because that was also not a grandfathered business, and they're two separate items, bed and breakfast and a fishing charter. At the Planning Board meeting, Mr. O'Connor stated that they were not asking the Board to condone the operation of the charter business from the dock, and as I said, I can't find anything in any of the zoning that allows this use. So I'm kind of perplexed as to why the Zoning Administrator sent the letter to the Lake George Park Commission saying that. As my letter to you stated, in the initial letter of July 11th, Mr. Martin said that a Class A Marina would be okay, too. He did rescind that statement, but he never rescinded the part where he said the fishing charter was allowed, and, honestly, I don't want a fishing charter business in my front yard. That's why I'm here. MR. TURNER-Okay. Any questions? MR. CARVIN-Not at this point. MR. TURNER-Okay. We might ask you back. So you can have a seat, and we'll take Mr. O'Connor. Do you want to respond to anything she said? MIKE O'CONNOR MR. O'CONNOR-I would, but I think it would be more appropriate if, we're appealing the decision of Mr. Martin. Maybe the Board ought to have the thoughts of Mr. Martin. I'll be glad to comment now if you want me to, but she's not appealing a decision L made. She's appealing the decision he made. MR. TURNER-No, I know she's not. MR. CARVIN-Yes. I'd like to hear Jim's side. MR. TURNER-All right. Jim. MR. MARTIN-In the letter you have, the reference is made to establishment of a bed and breakfast. A bed and breakfast is an allowed use in the Zoning Code, providing site plan review and approval is given from the Planning Board. That was obtained, and I think the last sentence in that letter, or the next to last sentence is key, "providing that the fishing guide service is incidental to the bed and breakfast, and that there will be no boat slips for rent with approval of this permit, I do not find any violations of the Zoning Code." So I'm not looking at this as two separate businesses. The sole business at the property is the bed and breakfast, and the guide service, or whatever is - 29 - "'. "'--' -../ being supplied there to the guests or the clients, is incidental to that, and that's how it was viewed. That was ffi..L. interpretation. Because it was stated in the deliberations in the past, when, I think we've had this up for area variance and site plan, that people ª-Lê.. staying overnight, and they're having breakfast before they go out. Breakfast is cooked on site. MR. MARESCO-So, Jim, we're calling this one business, then? MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. MARESCO-Is that what we're b,-ea kfast? saying, that the bed and MR. MARTIN-That's what I'm saying. MR. TURNER-That's what he's saying. Totally. I disagree with that. MR. KARPELES-But wasn't the guide service there before the bed and breakfast was there? MR. TURNER-It's in violation, yes. It was in violation. MR. MARTIN-As far as I know, my understanding of what I can recall is it's always operated in the fashion that it does today, since '84. People come and stay overnight and they go out fishing the next day. MR. TURNER-Well, that's not really how it started out, but. MR. MARTIN-As I say, from ffi..L. unde,-standing of it. MR. TURNER-Just for everybody's point, O'Connor can jump in here if he thinks is the way it goes. Mr. DiPalma has that's supposed to be only 100 square has, I believe. Am I not correct? what happened is, and Mr. I'm wrong. I think this a right-of-way to a dock feet, and that's all he MR. O'CONNOR-I don't know what relevance that has? MR. TURNER-I think it has a lot of relevance. MR. O'CONNOR-He has a right-of-way to a dock. MR. TURNER-He has a right-of-way to a dock that can only be 100 square feet. MICHAEL DIPALMA MR. DIPALMA-Right next to my property. MR. O'CONNOR-He has a right-of-way to a dock. constructed. Yes, that is correct. The dock is MR. TURNER-And I'm saying you can't mix apples with oranges. There's two businesses there. He's got a bed and breakfast, which he's allowed. He can't have a guide charter there. That's not allowed under the LC-42 zone. MR. MARTIN-My thing, what if Oudekerk's up the street here, for example, with their bed and breakfast, offer hay rides for guests, or some other type of, you know, a relatively passive recreation activity at the bed and breakfast? Am I supposed to go in and say, hay rides are disallowed as a use on the property, and there's two businesses here, hay rides for a price and, I mean, that's what I'm trying to establish here. MR. TURNER-Yes, I know. - 30 - "-- --.-/ MR. MARTIN-And then the other practical thing that I think should be mentioned is we're talking, literally, about, and I believe it's on the previous records, in the minutes, of 30 to 40 trips per year, is what's been stated in the record, as I recall, in the 360 day year. MR. CARVIN-Well, I think, first I'd like to address the bed and breakfast issue. A bed and breakfast facility. Bed and breakfast facility which is not a hotel or motel, but rather is a dwelling in which overnight accommodations for a maximum stay of one week and breakfast only are provided or offered to transient guests for compensation. MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. CARVIN-All right. It doesn't say anything that they can have a fishing charter. It just says breakfast is the only thing that's provided for compensation. MR. MARTIN-Right. Breakfast only, meaning, I take that to mean lunch or dinner is not offered. Breakfast is offered. MR. CARVIN-Well, I don't know. I think that's pretty explicit. MR. TURNER-I think it defines what a bed and breakfast is. MR. CARVIN-As far as what a bed and breakfast is. It's just for temporary, transient guests, and not a resort hotel. So hay rides and all that sort of stuff that are issued for cQmpensation in addition to, or incidental as you say, to a bed and breakfast, I don't think, is appropriate. MR. MARTIN-I defer to the Board. MR. TURNER-Mr. O'Connor. MR. O'CONNOR-I'm Mike O'Connor, for the record, from the law firm of Little and O'Connor. I do represent Michael DiPalma, and I guess my question that I have to begin with is kind of philosophical, and it's, when is enough enough? I really think tht this has been beaten to death. This began with an application for a building permit for a 14 ft. by 16 ft. addition to an existing building that was used, partially, as a bed and breakfast, occasionally as a bed and breakfast, with the allowance of those guests that stayed to also be taken out on the lake and fish on Lake George. We came here, initially, for an Area Variance because the 14 ft. by 16 ft. addition was closer to the side boundaries than was permitted by the zoning. LC-42 Acre zone has 100 foot setback, which is a very, acre lot, or something smaller than that, and it didn't meet those area requirements. When we were here, we got into a lengthy discussion about utilization of the property, or the balance of the property, for a bed and breakfast, and for the taking of those people out on the lake for fishing purposes. At that time, neither Staff nor this Board raised any issue as to whether or not that was not a permitted use, and not a proper or an appropriate use as part of the bed and breakfast. We then went forward, after we got the Area Variance, and applied for the building permit, and as part of the Area Variance, we stipulated that we would not use the 14 ft. by 16 ft. addition for bed and breakfast. We would keep it in the remainder of the property, because he said that we would have to have Site Plan Review if we're going to use that for bed and breakfast purposes, that 14 ft. by 16 ft. addition, I said you members that were on the Board at that time. I think you have three new Board members now. When we went for the building permit, we were told that, notwithstanding the fact that we would not use the 14 ft. by 16 ft. addition for bed and breakfast purposes, and for a base to have people go out on the lake. We would still need site plan review, because the property was in a Critically Environmentally - 31 - -/ Sensitive area, and any expansion, even if you have a variance, requires Site Plan Review. So we then applied for Site Plan Review, and this began in October of 1993. When we were applying for it, the question was raised by Staff, why don't you clear the issue and apply for your bed and breakfast permit for the entire building. We did. We went through, again, the process. Again Staff raised no issue about the fact that we were using this bed and breakfast as a base for taking people on the lake. Part of your record is an advertisement which tells people that we're going to take people out on the lake to go fishing from our property. We obtained a Site Plan approval for the expansion and for the operation of a bed and breakfast from the Planning Board. The next thing we had was a review by the sales tax people, were we charging the proper sales tax on these people coming through. This is just an ongoing thing, and I think something that's got to corne to a conclusion, a fair conclusion. ~Je resolved that issue. We then built the building and proceeded to operate. Based upon the building permits issued by this Town, based upon the approval by this Board, based on the approval by the Planning Board. We were then told that we couldn't use the dock to disembark from unless we had a Class A Marina, and that we should apply to the Lake George Park Commission for a Class A Marina. We then applied to the Lake George Park Commission. In the midst of that, all of a sudden the APA arrived, and they said that we couldn't apply to anybody until we went through the APA process. We finally went through all the regulations with the APA and we're still talking about a 14 ft. by 16 ft. addition in the grand Town of Queensbury, and they walked away or backed away, and they figured out that it was a (lost word) neighborhood problem. It wasn't a land use problem, and we went to the Lake George Park Commission, we pointed out in their rules and regulations that we don't need a Class A Marina permit, that there was a specific exemption to use the dock for people that are guests at the property that's upland of the dock. They said, fine, you don't need a Class A Marina, but then the neighbors said, well maybe they still need a Class A Marina because they use that dock to disembark from, to go out onto the lake and say pick up people at the Georgian Motel, and that's utilization of a marina. We went through two meetings with the Lake George Park Commission. They finally figured out that the activity that was being complained of by the neighbors wasn't taking place upland. It was taking place out on the lake, and that was not a Marina, within their definition. They're saying that the fellow getting in the boat and driving off to these far places and picking up people, which is still something that is permitted under the Lake George Park Commission, without a permit. It's like a person who keeps a truck at home and drives off and does work some place else, but utilizes that truck in the process of doing his work. I think that, we thought, was pretty much where we were. Then we have this ruling, or this question as ruling. I have a couple of questions on the application itself, and if you, I'm not sure where we're coming from, but if you look at the application for the appeal, it says, the applicant's appeal concerns the property owned by the applicant. That's Paragraph Three. I think you just read that, Mr. Thomas. Is that what we're talking about? We're talking about the property of Mr. and Mrs. Bleibtrey? If we are, then I'll leave. It talks about Tax Map No. 20-1-2. That's not the property of Mr. DiPalma. Mr. DiPalma's property Tax Map No. 20-1-8. The application, even for the interpretation, is fatally defective. It shouldn't be considered by this Board. It also is untimely. The Site Plan approval, which had the add talking about this, which had everything else that came along with this, was granted in January, January 25, 1994. There was an interpretation by Mr. Martin at that time on this very issue. The fact that he made a later letter covering the same subject matter doesn't renew the rights for the 60 day appeal. . They're outside the 30 day right of appeal for the Article 78. They're outside of the 60 days for the determination of the Zoning Administrator. They're not even talking about Mr. DiPalma's property, but he's put through the expense of hiring - 32 - '-- ~ somebody to come here and make this argument, and basically the argument, as I understand it, even if you're going to get to the variance, if you ever get to it, is that Mr. Martin has said that operating a fishing guide service incidental to a bed and breakfast is not a violation of the Town Ordinance. Now I've been through a few bed and breakfasts. I've been to one that offers horseback riding. I've been to one that had a petting zoo, if you will, of Llamas, that you went out and fed the Llamas and did whatever you did with them. There's one that has cross country skiing. There's two or three that I know of that have cross country skiing. They are in similar type areas as this. That, because they offer something, a bed and breakfast is to invite people into your home. There's one right up the street here, Harris, the Harris house right here. Those people go out and walk in the fields, walk in the berry patches. They don't stay just in the remains of the house or the residence. I know the definition, but the definition is not all exclusive. There's also, in our Ordinance, that the definitions are examples. Think of the bed and breakfast industry. You don't tell somebody that they can come and just stay in that bedroom, have their breakfast, and be on the road. That's not the nicety of a bed and breakfast. I've stayed in a bed and breakfast on Martha's Vineyard. You have full use of their (lost word). That's the benefit of going there. That's why you stay there. It's still a bed and breakfast. It's not a motel. It's not a hotel. It's a specific bed and breakfast. I think we've gotten to the point that we're regulating the regulations, and we're back to the same issue, at least five times on this one particular property. I don't think the application is correct. It's fatally defective. I don't think you have jurisdiction of these issues at this point. I think you're time barred, and even if you do get to a point where you think you have jurisdiction, I think on the merits, Mr. Martin's determination is a correct determination. Take a look at some of the definitions in the Ordinance. Accessory use. If it's incidental to the primary permitted use, it's permitted. There's even private recreational, definition within the definitions, which allows exceptions for use by guests. Whether this is on a right-of-way, Mr. Turner, or whether this is on 500 feet of frontage, that's an issue for the landowners to determine. If he's misusing his right-of-way, then they have their remedy. It's not a Zoning Board remedy, and even to get that into the characterization of the proof is, to me, upsetting. I think we ought to look at the Ordinance, and we ought to determine whether or not Mr. Martin is correct as Zoning Administrator. We ought to look to see if the Appeal is timely, and we ought to decide it on that basis. I don't think there's any basis here for you to determine that you cannot use this service, or you cannot take people out on the lake from your dock. We even talked, I think, when we were before the ZBA, and you can look at your minutes. about people going down on the dock and fishing, and we said, is that permitted? Yes, it is permitted. The big issue, then, was, and it still, I thought, was, until we saw this thing, is that we're not supposed to have people comB to the house, not utilize the house as a bed and breakfast, but go down to the dock and use it for fishing purposes, and we got into that issue greatly before the Lake George Park Commission, and that's why we got into the discussion about going to the Georgian and going to the Yard Arm Marina, or the Castaway Marina and picking people up if they were staying at a hotel over and Luzerne and they wanted to fish on Lake George, utilize the guide service of Mr. DiPalma. Even the Lake George Park Commission said that that's not operating a Marina. So, I don't know where you want to go, but we're prepared to oppose any determination on this that would prevent the utilization of Mr. DiPalma's property in full as part of this bed and breakfast. Part of his property is the dock, and his right to use that dock. Do you have any questions of us? MR. TURNER-Not yet. - 33 - '-- --" MR. MARESCO-I have one question. Is Mr. DiPalma charging a fee extra for this chartering of fishing? MR. O'CONNOR-No. He has one fee for people that stay at his place, and they're entitled to the service to go out on the lake. MR. MARESCO-So everything is, bed and breakfast, is one kind of package deal, basically? MR. O'CONNOR-Yes. MR. CARVIN-I think we should review the whole history going back, Ted, as I remember it. 1'1R. TURNER--Yes. MR. CARVIN-I think the Board should, as Mr. O'Connor has indicated, this is nothing that's new. This has been around for three or four years anyway. This is ~ memory. So this may be proven wrong upon examination. So I'm going to clarify that, and, Ted, you correct me. This all started, I think as Ted started out, that Mr. DiPalma has a right-of-way from his house through the Bleibtrey's property to his dock. I believe Mr. DiPalma came in. He wanted to expand that dock out 20 or 30 feet, or whatever the distance was, because the lake was going down, and he was having difficulty launching his boat. At that point, the issue that Mr. DiPalma was actually running a fishing and guide service, okay, I think I can qualify it as that, came out. MR. TURNER-But, and then also, he was leasing the dock to some other people who were also guides. MR. CARVIN-That's correct. MR. TURNER-And they were launching from there. MR. CARVIN-So, obviously, that caused a conflict with the Bleibtreys, because all Mr. DiPalma has is a 10 foot right-of- way. MR. O'CONNOR-Which, Mr. Carvin, says he can use it for what purpose? MR. CARVIN-Well, again, I'm not going to get into the merits. I just want to bring the Board up to speed here, at this point, as to what the history is, but I want, the determination, as it came down, was that that was not the use. They could use it for private boats, but for his fishing and guide service, which was never addressed, he would have to drive off premise and pick them up at another location. MR. O'CONNOR-At that point there was no issue of them staying at his house, though. MR. CARVIN-That's correct. MR. O'CONNOR-That was a separate issue then. Was that before the '88 change which permitted bed and breakfast in this area? MR. CARVIN-That I don't remember, but it was in that timeframe. MR. O'CONNOR-The initial dock permit, that was before they made bed and breakfast a permitted use. MR. TURNER-I think you're right. MR. CARVIN-All right. - 34 - '---- ~ MR. O'CONNOR-So that's a completely different Ordinance. MR. CARVIN-That issue was pretty dormant until a few months ago, when it came to light, I'm trying to think, you wanted to put an addition on, and the fact that he was advertising as a bed and breakfast came to the front, and the whole can of worms spilled out again, because it became a matter of, was this an expansion of a use, or was this just a plain area variance, and Mr. DiPalma said that, and this is what Mr. O'Connor is referring to, that this was just going to be his private residence, and then during the course, it was applied for as a bed and breakfast. MR. O'CONNOR-We applied, initially, to use the 14 ft. by 16 ft. addition as part of the bed and breakfast. MR. CARVIN-That I will disagree with. MR. O'CONNOR~And then we stipulated it would not be used as part of the bed and breakfast. MR. CARVIN-At no time during the initial, prior to your coming, was it ever mentioned. MR. O'CONNOR-You've got your Area Variance decision. MR. CARVIN-I have the decision, but you've got to remember, we went through four or five meetings before that decision was rendered, and in the initial, it was not, there was never any mention of a bed and breakfast. In fact, it was asked of Mr. DiPalma several times if it was a bed and breakfast, and he basically said he was running a guide service, but we had advertisements that indicated that he was running a bed and breakfast. Now I'm not saying that he couldn't run a bed and breakfast, but the way it came down was that that was not going to be the intent of that addition. MR. TURNER-Okay. The intent of the addition, in the discussion IrJas. MR. CARVIN-Was for his momentos and things like that. MR. TURNER-Right, his momentos and his office and whatever. MR. CARVIN-Well, again, as I said, as the meetings evolved, and this went over several months. Isn't that right, Chris? MR. THOM(-\S-Yes. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. CARVIN-It was a case that, finally in January we made a decision and we had to postpone the decision because, I'm trying to think, there was some conflict because there was a question on our motion, if my memory serves correct. I haven't reviewed the minutes on this, but it seems to me that. MR. O'CONNOR-There was a decision made, and then there was a conflict afterwards whether or not your decision granting the variance was proper because the initial resolution did not have a majority. MR. TURNER-Yes. That's right. MR. O'CONNOR-So that was after the decision, and that was also determined to be a moot point in this particular issue. MR. CARVIN-Right, because Mr. Dusek gave us, or rendered an opinion at that case. MR. O'CONNOR-We've been here, for the Board members, we were here - 35 - ~» almost every month for about seven, eight months in a row. MR. CARVIN-So, for some of the new members, that's the history as L remember it, subject to change. MR. O'CONNOR-But the basic issue is, what is a bed and breakfast? A bed and breakfast is a permitted use. We have Site Plan approval for it. Mr. Martin has said that we can use the full extent of our property, whatever it is, for whatever activity there is on it, as incidental to that bed and breakfast operation. MR. CARVIN-I guess the other question that I have is, is it, when I was out there, I saw no indication of bed and breakfast being advertised, but it's the Beaver Lodge, or something. The sign says Beaver Creek Lodge. MR. O'CONNOR-It's not a very intense use. that's, mostly it is done through. It's not something MR. CARVIN-Most bed and breakfast's say, Joe Smosh's bed and b,-eakfast. MR. O'CONNOR-Then we probably would have to come here for a Sign Variance. Can you put a sign up for bed and breakfast? MR. MARTIN-No. MR. O'CONNOR-Maybe we ought to have that so the Board, if I remember right, I haven't read this (lost word) you can't advertise under your regulations. MR. TURNER-Not with a sign, without a variance. MS. CIPPERLY-Well, it's because signs are not allowed in an LC-42 zone. MR. O'CONNOR-Well, I think he may have asked. MR. DIPALMA-I have a few things I'd like to say (lost word) were concerned about our first meeting. You were correct, that the use of this addition was to be used for my bed and breakfast, and you were concerned about that. That was one of the underlying things that bothered you. Anyway, it's done now. It's done, and it's as I said it would be, I said it wouldn't be, even to this day, that I have a bed and breakfast. This addition is not used for bed and breakfast. It is a den and an office. It's not fully equipped yet because I can't afford these things. I had to put a brand new driveway in, and this room is a den and office. It doesn't have a desk. It has one chair. That's it right now. When I can afford a sofa, I'll put it in, and that's the room, and it does have (lost word) like you said earlier, but that was the intent of the room in the beginning, and even now. MR. TURNER-We're not talking about that. MR. CARVIN-I think we want to limit ourselves to what Mr. O'Connor has indicated and what Mrs. Bleibtrey is arguing here. MR. TURNER-She's questioning the right of you to have a fishing guide in an LC zone. MR. O'CONNOR-For our guests. We do not claim to have a right to take other people off of that dock for fishing purposes, if anybody has got that confusion. MR. MARESCO-You don't solicit any other fishing or anything? MR. O'CONNOR-If they do not stay at the premises. - 36 - ~ ) -../ MR. KARPELES-Nobody goes except people that stay overnight? MR. O'CONNOR-Yes. Nobody does, to be perfectly candid, nobody does for hire. He has friends that come that go fishing with him from that dock, but they do not pay him in any manner that I'm aware of. MR. CARVIN-Okay. Could we back up for just a second? I know we've had you gentlemen, Mrs. Bleibtrey, I'm sure, has got a number of rebuttals at this point. Maybe we could ask her to come up. MR. O'CONNOR-Is that, you asked ~ talking, or arguing that we have the come, get out of their car, and say, fishing service. Take me down to the Those people we will still go to another a question. We're not right to take people who I want to utilize your dock and we'll go off. site and pick them up. MR. TURNER-No, but I think our main focus and their main question is, is this an allowed use in a Land Conservation 42 Acre zone. MR. O'CONNOR-If you go even further than that, you've got a bed and breakfast permit. Look at the other uses that are in the LC- 42. You can have a fishing lodge. You can have this type of recreation activity. My position is that it's incidental to the bed and breakfast, and the bed and breakfast is a legitimate use. MR. TURNER-All right. So my next question is, bed and breakfast have a separate 10 from the guide service, for tax purposes? 1'1R. 0' CONNOR--No . MR. OIPALMA-I pay sales tax on bed and breakfast. MR. TURNER-Okay, but do you have a separate 10 for that one? MR. OIPALMA-I have an ID for the bed and breakfast. MR. TURNER-Do you have an 10 for the guide service? MR. DIPALMA-You don't need one. MR. O'CONNOR-It's not a taxable service. MR. DIPALMA-It's not taxable. MR. TURNER-Okay. Maybe it's not a taxable service, but it is a business. Is that correct? MR. O'CONNOR-It's only one charge, Mr. Turner. MR. TURNER-But you're advertising it as a business, are you not? MR. DIPALMA-I advertise as a New York State licensed guide, taking people to the rivers of the Adirondacks fishing and I'm a charter on Lake George, with lodging and breakfast. That's how I advertise. MR. TURNER-Yes, but that wasn't the way you advertised it before. MR. DIPALMA-It's been that way for two or three years. MR. TURNER-No, no. MR. MARESCO-So they're actually coming to secondary to that, they're staying there, the bed and breakfast. use the charter and, instead of staying at MR. DIPALMA-They need a place to stay overnight, if they're going to come for a two day trip. - 37 - MR. MARESCO-So, technically, they're coming to use the fishing, secondary sleeping and staying there, instead versa, staying at the bed and breakfast and using the fishing as just a complimentary. Am I right? charter of vice char teì" MR. O'CONNOR-No, I don't think so. MR. MARESCO-But that's how it's advertised. MR. O'CONNOR-It's advertised as a bed and breakfast with fishing services available. Now I don't know how you characterize that being the primary purpose as being the fishing. MR. MARESCO-That's how it's advertised. vJas advertised. That's how he said it MR. O'CONNOR-Well, you have an advertisement in your record. MR. CARVIN-It may be somewhat dated at this point. Do you have anything current? MR. DIPALMA-I'd have to go out to the truck and get it. MR. CARVIN-Yes. Sure. MR. O'CONNOR-Bed and breakfast is a permitted use. MR. MARESCO-That's the primary? MR. O'CONNOR-The people can either out on the lake. The issue here dock, and they get into a boat. go out on the lake or not go is whether they go off this MR. TURNER-No. I think the issue is the use. MR. O'CONNOR-No. What Luzerne and go fishing? happens if the people go They're still there. up to Lake MR. TURNER-That's fine. MR. O'CONNOR-Well, then the issue is going off the dock. MR. TURNER-No. I'm saying to you that you can't mix apples with oranges. You can't say that you've got a bed and breakfast here, and you've got a guide service and a charter business over here. MR. O'CONNOR-My familiarity, and maybe everybody else has got different familiarities with bed and breakfasts, they usually have some amenity that they offer as part of the accommodations. MR. TURNER-That's fine, but that's not a charter business, not that kind of. Like you said, they go cross country skiing. MR. O'CONNOR-If I go cross country skiing at Hilltop (lost word) that's not an accommodation, the same as letting us go fishing? MR. KARPELES-Well, maybe they don't have the same definition of a bed and breakfast as we have. MR. MENTER-Mike, if I saw his ad, and I wanted to do some fishing, okay, and I had a cabin in the area or some friends in the area, and I came over to whatever the address in the ad was, and said, hey, I need a charter. I need someone to take me out at this place, you'd say, okay, I'll pick you up over here somewhere. Is that how that would work? MR. O'CONNOR-Yes. MR. MENTER-Okay, but I would go to his house. - 38 - '-' '---"" MR. O'CONNOR-Typically, you would contact him somehow, either call him, or most people call him. MR. MENTER-Yes. I understand what you're saying about the bed and breakfast. I can see how a certain activity would be part and parcel to it, and given the fact that the right-of-way predated the approval for the bed and breakfast, I can see where you could assume that that would be permissible as part of the bed and breakfast, but it seems that there's another element of a business there, where he's doing charters, if you stay for bed and breakfast there and he's doing them if you don't. That's what I'm getting at. MR. O'CONNOR-I think that part is saying no one can conduct any business from their home. We have people throughout the whole Town that actually don't operate their business at their homes, or they don't provide the service at their home, but their available there. I have an electrician that I call, and he lives on the street. I call him at his house, and it's on the weekend, and I need something. I go to his house and see if he'll come and do something for me. He's not operating a business, I don't think, from that residence, because I know where to get him. Otherwise people, I don't know how people, everybody who's in any s;el f. MR. MARTIN-Well, that's what home occupation is, essentially. MR. O'CONNOR-That's not a occupation is on premises. home occupation, because home MR. TURNER-It's on premises. It's incidental to the residence. MR. O'CONNOR-I don't see that that's the issue. The issue here is using the dock for the guests, at the residence. MR. FORD-Just to clarify, I believe it's been established that no one uses the dock who does not use the bed and breakfast? MR. O'CONNOR-Yes. MR. FORD-Does anyone use the bed and breakfast who does not use the dock? MR. O'CONNOR-On occasion, yes. They go fishing on another river or another lake, but they still use the bed and breakfast. MR. KARPELES-Do they pay the same rate as the people you go fishing, use the charter business? MR. O'CONNOR-Yes, I understand they do, and Mr. DiPalma would have to answer that question, but I understand they do. MR. TURNER-Mr. O'Connor, are you done for now? MR. O'CONNOR-Unless you have more questions. MR. TURNER-Okay. All right, Mrs. Bleibtrey, you can come forwa1"d. MRS. BLEIBTREY-On my application, to address some of Mr. O'Connor's concerns, I put I was the property owner because I pay the taxes on that, even though it's a right-of-way through my property. That's one thing, the appeal is timely because it's based on the July 11th letter to the Park Commission, and it was made by within 60 days. So don't worry about that. It was based on the Park Commission letter because that Park Commission letter was a reversal of what happened in January of '94, and the position that the Zoning Administrator took at that time, I'm referring to the bed and breakfast and the Planning Board review. If you're thinking of the fishing charter as an accessory use, there's nothing in the zoning law that states that use is - 39 - allowed, in the Accessory uses, or in the or (lost word) at least I couldn't find anything, as an accessory use. The only thing is, from the January 25, 1994 Planning Board review minutes, and this may help clarify your concerns, Mr. Turner, Mr. O'Connor states, "we are not asking this Board to condone the operation of a charter business from the dock. We stipulate to that, and we understand that what we're talking about is permission to allo~ people to stay over at this premises", etc., etc. I think we've tried to be very careful to separate the charter operation from this activity. So in his own words, and you're welcome to look at this, it's two separate operations. Also in the January 25th meeting, the Zoning Administrator stated that there should be no commercial use of his dock, because it was in a residential area, LC-42A. Businesses are not allowed, and as I stated before, the bed and breakfast is, because of the date on that, but that's not the point here. The point is fishing charters are not an allowed use in LC-42A, whether it's accessory or not. MR. O'CONNOR-Mr. Turner, if I could respond to just that one comment. You've got to look at the entire minutes of the January 25th meeting. What they're referring to was operating a charter service fo)- people who didn't stay at the property, and that's what we were distinguishing from, and we indicated that we were not intending to operate a charter service for strangers of the property, and it would be operated only as incidental to the bed and breakfast, and I think if you look at the whole context of those minutes, and not one paragraph, you can see that that's the comments they've made, and I stand by those comments today. That's what we're talking about. We recognize that if we take people in, or we try to take people out on Lake George, we have to go to some other facility to pick them up, if they are not going to stay at the bed and breakfast. MR. TURNER-Okay. Let me open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED GRACE ELIZABETH HANNEFORD MRS. HANNEFORD-My name is Grace Elizabeth Hanneford. I've been a resident here for most of my life, and I don't want a fishing business in my neighborhood. I live in a residential district, and I would like to have it that way, and I don't want, I train horses there. That's why we moved there, but it's still, it's now a residential, and I would like to have it that way. I don't want strange people coming around. At this time, I'm really alone. MR. MENTER-Is that happening now? Has that been happening? MRS. HANNEFORD-Strange people are coming in for this fishing expedition, and in the summer time, when I have my windows open in my bedroom, I can hear the noise come out. It's not very pleasant. MR. TURNER-Do you still live on Hanneford Road? MRS. HANNEFORD-Yes, I do. MR. TURNER-How far in? Where you used to live? MRS. HANNEFORD-Where I've always lived, 3 Hanneford Road. MR. TURNER-Yes. I remember. MRS. HANNEFORD-And it's right across from that dock. MR. TURNER-Yes. Okay. MRS. HANNEFORD-Thank you. - 40 - "--"' ~ MR. TURNER-Thank you. Anyone else wish to be heard? BETTY MONAHAN, TOWN BOARD MEMBER MRS. MONAHAN-Betty Monahan, Town Board. I'm not commenting, per se, one way or another, but there are a lot of minutes affecting this application. I might suggest that you want to table this and have the Planning Department furnish you with the full sets of minutes, because I think when you read them in their entirety, your mind is going to be clarified about a lot of the issues. MR. CARVIN-I think that's a very good suggestion. i"1R. TURNER-Yes. MR. CARVIN-I think before we do anything, make any determination, that all the Board be supplied with the minutes. MR. TURNER-Yes. I suggested that right from the very start. MR. KARPELES-I think that's a good idea. MR. TURNER-Yes, because, you know, these guys don't know anything about it. MR. FORD-As a person who has to play catch up, I'd certainly support that. I'd like to review it all in its entirety. MR. TURNER-Would anyone else like to speak? JON DEMARCO MR. DEMARCO-My name is John DeMarco. I live in Rockhurst. I'm pretty much in that area every day, and I don't think marinas are in all residential areas, and they're all nonconforming uses. I don't see them as changing the economy of the area by any means. It doesn't do that much business. I would think that a bed and breakfast, as there is one on Rockhurst Road, as you know, and they have docks where you can go fishing, and they go swimming and they use the facilities in the area. I just don't see where it's going to do any harm. The person that's complaining is not going to be here shortly anyway. It won't affect them. Their place is for sale. I think he should have the ability to earn a living. He's going to be here. MS. CIPPERLY-Do you know the name of the place on Rockhust Road? MR. DEMARCO-No. You look it up. Jf~NE PEL TIER MRS. PELTIER-My name is Jane Peltier. I was here before. I live across from DiPalma's. His house is here. My house is over here. So I'm probably about just as far his as Gracie is. I also have a right-of-way right next to his right-of-way (lost word) dock where we keep our boat. We use our boat practically every time we have a chance. So we are down by that area quite a lot, early in the morning, late at night. I can see Mr. DiPalma get on his boat. I have been outside, sitting on my porch. He's had his bed and breakfast people. He is not noisy. There are no more strangers running around down there, than the strangers, the people that ha\le boats down theì-e, have. I don't know them either. So if somebody's walking around, he's a stranger to me, but he may be a guest of someone that has a boat down there. I don't see any more activity, any disturbance down there, because he has a bed and breakfast. In fact, since this all come out, his house is (lost word). It's been beautified very much with the driveway and everything. It has added to the neighborhood, really. It looks very, very nice. In fact, the lake mingles with that brown driveway, and it looks beautiful, but as a - 41 - -' neighbor, I see no problems with it, and I do use, we do, we are one of the ones. There are quite a few of us on this right-of- way. Not everybody has a boat down there. So not everybody goes down there, but I am down there, and I see it when he takes the people out, and it's no different than, he doesn't have that much of a business. Lets face it. I mean, it's nothing that, if he did, then I would object, too, probably, but he doesn't. He doesn't have any more people going out than if I have my relatives up. MR. TURNER-Okay, but by the same token, maybe down the line he might have more business. So what does that do? MRS. PELTIER-Down the line, I doubt it very much, because he can't afford it. He doesn't have the room. I mean, down the line, somebody may build a dock down there that's out of whack, too. Who knows? I don't know. Maybe people on the other side may build a great big house, which has happened around there, which doesn't conform to the neighborhood, but it's done. so, at this point, I'm saying, as a neighbor, that's all, I don't see any problem with it. MR. TURNER-All right. Thank you. Anyone else? GAVIN ROONEY MR. ROONEY-My name's Gavin Rooney. I live on Hanneford Road. I go in and out, as Mike's house, I've know Mike about 30 years. The only thing I see, I'd know if he had somebody there if I see a strange car, figure that he's probably got somebody there. It's a very low key type thing. I certainly don't see any problem with it, and that's it. MR. TURNER-Okay. JOHN BEALS MR. BEALS-My name is John Beals. I've lived on Lake George 70 years of my life, and as I recall Charlie Wood took people in and out of that bay fishing. I have the first dock outside of the bridge, where you cross Van Warner Bay, and I don't seem to have any problem with it down there. There are other people in there that rent the docks, all up along the lake there. Some of them as many, you have three or four docks, and we don't have any problems with anybody on that side of the lake, and I have heard no noise down, and I look right down on the area, and I've heard no noise, and my bedroom opens right out to that area, and I've never heard any noise from Mr. DiPalma's house. I've never seen any more than one car there at a time, and he's a good neighbor. MR. TURNER-Okay. Anyone else? Okay. Well, I think, at this point, what we ought to do is get the minutes and everybody bone up on them, and we'll put it to rest for now. I would move to table it until the Board has a chance to review all the records that's involved, and for the new members. MR. FORD-Can I ask a question of each of the last three people who spo ke? MR. TURNER-You sure can. MR. FORD-Do you have free access to that dock, free use of it? MRS. PELTIER-Who, me? MR. FORD-The last three people who spoke. MRS. PELTIER-What dock are you talking about? MR. FORD-The dock from which the charters leave. - 42 - ""-" .-.-" MR. BEALS-No. They have separate docks. MRS. PELTIER-No. Our right-of-way is next to his. We have a right-of-way to the dock and Mike has a right-of-way to the dock. MR. O'CONNOR-They're separate docks. MRS. PELTIER-They're separate docks. MR. FORD-But, basically, are you using his dock? MRS. PELTIER-No. MR. FORD-Okay. Thank you. MR. O'CONNOR-Mr. Turner, if you're going to table this matter, I would also like to have you refer it to the Town Attorney for his review, as to the timeliness of the appeal, and also as to the issue of the correctness of the appeal, as far as the application before this Board. MR. TURNER-Okay. I'd move to table. MR. MARTIN-Ted, are we going to allowability? Because I don't want a lot of minutes to copy, and a lot do that if we find that there's a problem doing it, but. get a determination to go ahead and make, of work, and I don't procedural, I mean, I on the there's I.oJa nt to have no MR. TURNER-I think the first step is, lets consult with Paul on the procedural end of the appeal, first. MR. MARTIN-Right, and if the Board decides they want to hear it, then I'll go ahead and, that's a lot of copies, a lot of work. MR. O'CONNOR-If I could make a statement, if I might, for the record, just so Paul understands, because I take it that he was going to see these minutes to make a determination of whether or not this is procedurally correct. 1'1R. TURNER--Yes. MR. O'CONNOR-Because I'm not even sure, if you were to agree with the applicant that the Zoning Administrator made an incorrect statement, or took an incorrect position in that letter of July 11th, what effect that has upon this particular applicant. This applicant is operating under a site plan approval that included all of the aspects of what we've talked about, that was granted by final determination of the Planning Board, in January of 1994. The Article 78 period for appeal of that determination was 30 days. MR. CARVIN-Okay, and you're saying the 30 days expired when, Mike? MR. O'CONNOR-February 24, 1994, and even before that, this Board made a determination, with all the aspects of what we're talking about, on December 12, 1993, and there was an Article 78 appeal available from that determination, which would have expired January 12, 1994. This letter that was issued turned out to be a nullity, because, in essence, the letter was not acted upon. There was a letter to the Lake George Park Commission, and the Lake George Park Commission determined that it didn't need to issue a permit for a Class A Marina. So they terminated the proceeding. So there's been no action taken upon that letter, and I think that's an issue, as far as the procedural correctness, or, if not the procedural correctness, the application of whatever your determination might be. I will take the position that it is not applicable to Mr. DiPalma, because the Article 78 period has run on the determinations that affect - 43 - "-- -- its use in the aspects of which also take the position that it simply because of the application of the applicant, and I want that we have explained does not affect saying it affects on the record. them. I "'J ill Mr. DiPalma, the property MR. TURNER-It's on the record. MR. O'CONNOR-Thank you. MS. CIPPERLY-Do you want to specify a month? MR. CARVIN-I think the first thing that ought to be done is have Paul really look at it and see if this is a valid case. In other words, if it comes out that there's no standing in law, then that resolves the problem. MR. TURNER-That takes care of it. MR. CARVIN-Unless there's a court of sure there probably is, but it's not determines that there is grounds for think we all should have the minutes. higher appeal, which I'm out of here, but if Paul us to move forward, then I MR. MARTIN-Then I'll proceed ahead and make all the copies. MR. CARVIN-So I think it's very hardpressed to establish a timeframe, because I don't know what Paul's schedule is. At this point, it's probably pretty full, and I don't suspect there's much fishing in January. Right? MR. O'CONNOR-Mostly in February. use. MR. TURNER-Okay. the first step of done in 60 days? It's the highest part of the So that'll be the first step. the tabling resolution, then. That "'Jould be Can \¡Je get it MR. MARTIN-Ted, the best thing, when you have these requests of Paul is for you, as the Chairman, to speak with him directly. MR. TURNER-All right. MOTION TO TABLE NOTICE OF APPEAL NO. 4-94 MARGARET E. BLEIBTREY, Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Fred Carvin: So, that Paul Dusek can look at this, and if he determines that the appeal has any standing, then the minutes will have to be done up and forwarded to the members for their review, and then we'll schedule another hearing to determine the outcome. Duly adopted this 19th day of October, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Maresco, Mr. Ford, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE MR. TURNER-We've got to do the resolution for, we still have some business. These are just discussion items. We have a request from Charles H. Scudder for a parcel on Quaker Road zoned Light Industrial. Client wishes to conduct truck rental, which is Light Industrial, and auto sales, which needs Highway Commercial, Parcel No. 110-1-1.23. MR. MARTIN-Let me give the Board some quick background, here. There was a project, Hertz/Pensky, Barrett Truck and Auto Sales came to the Town, I believe, in 1990 for placement of a business on Quaker Road, next to the Car Wash. I think it would be on the - 44 - '--' J west side of the Car Wash, or essentially between there and the nursery. It was approved as a truck repair, or truck sales and truck repair facility. That's Light Industrial zoning there, and everything was fine, but it never came to fruition, obviously, for whatever reasons, and the site plan application voided with the year's passing. A new application came in recently, essentially, for the same thing. The zoning district is still the same over the parcel. It's in the exact same location. However, the applicant noted in the description of the business to be placed there, truck and auto sales, and truck repair and auto sales. Now, as you know, truck repair and truck sales is an allowed use in Light Industrial, but the auto related aspect of it is going to kick in the need for a variance. MR. TURNER-A variance, yes, use variance. MR. MARTIN-That, and is there anything, Charlie, you wanted to add? Charlie's the applicant, or the engineer on the project for the site plan review. CHARLES SCUDDER MR. SCUDDER-This It's on the same I was under the that this was a bot h cou nts . penn i t ted use. MR. MARTIN-This is There's the parcel think Mazda's there site is adjacent to the Car Wash on Quaker Road. side. It's Just the service road is in between. impression that it was Highway Commercial, and permitted use, and I was in error on that, on It's not Highway Commercial, and it's not a a current zoning map. This is Quaker Road. in question. It's all Light Industrial. I by variance. MR. TURNER-They are. MR. MARTIN-Because this used to be Plaza Commercial, in the old code. MR. TURNER-Right. MR. MENTER-So that service road ~Jill just be an auxiliary access. It fronts onRQuté'9, it fronts on Quaker, rather. MR. SCUDDER-Yes, but that's, it's not available to us. We have to have our own entrance off Quaker. There's a service road, however, or interior road inside the subdivision which would form a horse shoe that goes out to Dix, and that would be our rear exit. MS. CIPPERLY-Our discussion with Mr. Scudder was along the lines of, there are several auto related uses there that are there by variance, and part of it was, is this more appropriate for a rezoning, perhaps, or a variance, and you could say, maybe the rezoning's more appropriate, except that· he wants to put mixed uses. MR. MARTIN-See, even if Highway Commercial were in existence in the zoning there, the problem would be with the truck sales, then, because truck sales and truck repair are not a permitted use in Highway Commercial. MS. CIPPERLY-So he either needs to split zone a parcel, and use half of it, or we just were looking for your this. some hOlrJ , input on MR. SCUDDER-We've talked, primarily, about sales, I think truck and auto sales. He's a big leaser, and a renter. MR. TURNER-And he repairs the equipment that he leases, doesn't he? MR. SCUDDER-Yes. His proposal is to build a fairly substantial - 45 - building. I have a thing here. MR. TURNER-He's like Leroy Holden on the other side, the same thing They lease and they repair. MR. MARTIN-He has a current business up on. MR. SCUDDER-Queensbury Avenue and Lower Dix. MR. TURNER-Yes. I know where he is. MR. SCUDDER-But we can't get into the substantive stuff because of the zoning. We need some guidance. MR. MARTIN-And from my standpoint, as Zoning Administrator, it's a situation that requires a use variance. MR. TURNER-Yes. If a variance comes, you've got to have a use variance. Yes. I think one of the questions to be raised is how intense is this heavy truck business going to be? MR. SCUDDER-He's not in heavy trucks at all. The trucks that he has. MR. TURNER-He's in tractor trailers. He has over the road stuff. I'm pretty sure he does. I've seen them there. MR. SCUDDER-Tractor trailers? MR. TURNER-Yes. He does repair work on them. MR. MARTIN-I just really feel compelled to say something, here, though, as Staff, as I see it. As a Judicial Board, I think you should be careful as to how much you comment on an application prior to, you know, you don't even have anything official yet. So I just want to point that out. MR. CARVIN-I think that you could pursue both. I think that a use variance is going to be required under the current coding. MR. MARTIN-We gave Mr. Scudder a copy of the considerations that are made by the Board as you consider a use variance. MR. TURNER-I think the criteria is how fast you want to get in there. MR. CARVIN-If you want to pursue a zoning change, certainly there's a mechanism for that, too. MR. TURNER-If you're going for a zoning change, you're probably looking at two, three months, maybe more. MR. SCUDDER-Well, the practical considerations are that his contractor, or what appears to be his contractor, wants to get the foundation in before frost and so on. The Planning Board is going to, until the zoning issue came up, and I don't know how that (lost word) that. MR. TURNER-That puts it on the back burner. MR. SCUDDER-They were going to hear this next week. MR. TURNER-Yes. They're not going to hear it now. The variance has to come first. MR. SCUDDER-Right. MS. CIPPERLY-The other question was, you can put the Light Industrial use in there, with the Planning Board approval, and then seek a variance to put the car part on there, if that - 46 - "--" --",' wouldn't affect your site plan. MR. SCUDDER-What if he didn't get the variance? I mean, he can't run half his business. MR. MARTIN-It's limited to the allowed uses, until the variance is. MR. SCUDDER-Right. I mean, he'd have the trucks and no cars, or the cars and no trucks, depending on the zone, but he needs both. The way his business is structured, he needs both, the truck leasing, the car leasing and rental, the sales and so forth and so on. He's down there on the corner of Queensbury Avenue and Dix, they, I should say. They're brothers. I guess they're just now getting in a position where they can move up and take advantage of their property there. So we don't know which way to go. MR. TURNER-Well, you know, like you say, he's a multiuse facility, and that's going to require a use variance, and if you don't try it, you're going to wait for re-zoning. MR. SCUDDER-Well, we're prepared to go for the use variance. MR. TURNER-Well, you can demonstrate a hardship, you know, that you can't realize a reasonable return as zoned. That's what you've got to do. You've got to prove all the points under the use variance. MR. MARTIN-And we gave you a copy of those today. MR. SCUDDER-Which I haven't had a chance to look at. Okay. We did want to raise the issue and get you thinking about it. MR. TURNER-I've been wondering why he didn't go there before. MR. SCUDDER-I think probably he didn't have the money. MR. TURNER--Yes. MR. MARTIN-Well, plus, I think we would have run into a, in a way, this could have been a blessing. Had he gone in there as a truck repair facility and I started seeing car sales there, then that would have been an enforcement action, as opposed to, now we're catching it in advance. MR. SCUDDER-Well, we don't want to get into that. want to get into that. He doesn't MR. TURNER-Okay. Does that answer all your questions? MR. SCUDDER-When can we get this on for? MS. CIPPERLY-If you get the application in by the 26th, it would be on for November. MR. MARTIN-November 16th or 23rd. MR. SCUDDER-Meanwhile, the Planning Board activity is. MR. TURNER-Dead in the water. MR. SCUDDER-Dead in the water. MR. MARTIN-On the auto related uses. r1R. SCUDDER-On this project. the auto. He's not going He'd be foolish to. to proceed with half MS. CIPPERLY-You can ask to have that tabled. - 47 - --- MR. SCUDDER-Thank you very much for staying and listening to t.his. MR. TURNER-Okay. Yes. Thank you. MR. THOMAS-A meeting the 23rd, the day before Thanksgiving? MR. MARTIN-That will probably be adjusted. MR. TURNER-Yes. That generally gets adjusted. MR. MARTIN-We always run into this problem in November and December. MR. TURNER-Everybody's got the information on the Sanford's Ridge Bed and Breakfast. Okay, and then we've got a letter from James and Hannah Nash, in reference to the garage setback that we granted Mr. Irish. i"1R. CARVIN-I,..Jha.t ' s the point? MR. TURNER-The point is that they. i"1R. MENTER-That they weren't in TOI"m and they ~..,eren 't happy. MR. TURNER-They were out of town. They weren't happy, and, evidentally, Mr. Irish discussed the issue with Mr. Nash's wife instead of Mr. Nash, and he's not happy with the decision and the outcome. MR. CARVIN-Well, lets see, if that was last month, he's got 60 days to file a challenge. MR. THOMAS-When were the notices sent out for that hearing? MS. CIPPERLY-That would have been. MR. THOMAS-Way after he left for Florida, or for vacation, right? Because he left September 5th, 6th. MS. CIPPERLY-Probably right around there it would have gotten to him. MR. THOMAS-Yes. So he probably didn't get notice of it. MR. TURNER-No, he didn't. MR. THOMAS-But is that our fault? MS. CIPPERLY-They felt strongly that they wanted the Board to know that they at least were not happy with the variance. What they're concerned to some extent is the other things that are not going to be in the garage, and I told them that the Zoning Board does not have any juridiction over where people put, they're afraid that that 13 foot space between the garage and their property line is going to fill up with boat trailers and whatever else is there now. MR. TURNER-He wants four feet less. He's not happy with the 24 feet width. He wants it to be 20. MR. MENTER-They're problem is the car, not the garage. MS. CIPPERLY-So, I don't know if anybody, if you want to make any response to this letter. MR. TURNER-Yes. Their problem is the racing car and his ability to use the garage to work on it, and work in the garage and work on the car. MR. MENTER-It's just something that we can't dictate under any - 48 - ",---r ~ circumstances anyway. MR. CARVIN-I suppose we could re-hear it, right? MR. TURNER-Yes. We could re-hear it, but we'd have to have a unanimous vote of everybody here. MR. CARVIN-I remember the case, but I don't remember it. MS. CIPPERLY-A copy of your resolution is on Ted's. I didn't make copies of the whole thing for everybody. MR. TURNER-Right. Here's what we said. "The applicant is proposing to construct a 12 ft. by 24 ft. addition to an existing one car garage and is seeking relief from Section 179-20C, which requires a side yard setback of 20 feet. That we grant the applicant seven feet of relief from Section 179-20C. Due to the concurrent configuration of the applicant's house and garage, the siting of a new proposed addition mandates that a variance be requested and granted. By granting of this variance, there would be no adverse effect on the neighborhood or community, and this difficulty is more the result of the lot size in that subdivision as compared to the current one acre zoning. II So we granted him seven feet of relief from the 20 foot. MR. CARVIN-So he's still 13 feet. MR. TURNER-He's 13 feet off the line, and they want it four more feet off the line. What's the Board's pleasure? Do you want a resolution to re-hear it, or what do you want to do? MR. THOMAS-I don't want to re-hear it. MR. TURNER-Okay. MR. MENTER-I would agree with that. MR. THOMAS-He has his course of action of doing an Article 78, just like everybody else, if he doesn't like what we did. It's not our fault he went on vacation. MR. TURNER-Okay. I don't think a motion's required. We're just not going to re-hear it. MR. MENTER-Right. MR. TURNER-No. It's a moot question, Additional business. Mahar extension. Mahar's request. He needs 60 days encountered by the surveyors. I don't at this point. Okay. We have to extend Mr. more, due to difficulty have a problem with it. MR. THOMAS-I have no problem with it. MOTION TO APPROVE AN EXTENSION FOR AREA VARIANCE NO. 39-1994 ROBERT AND JOAN MAHAR, Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by David Menter: For 60 days more. Duly adopted this 19th day of October, 1994, by the following vote: MS. CIPPERLY-Which would put him on the December. MR. TURNER-Yes. Right. AYES: Mr. Maresco, Mr. Ford, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Turner NOES : NOi'~E - 49 - - -- MR. TURNER-Okay. The guess I didn't say it Variance No. 35-1994. made. Fitz resolution, in all the discussion, I was a resolution. An amendment to the Area So I'll move the following correction be MOTION TO AMEND RESOLUTION FOR AREA VARIANCE NO. 35-1994 PAULA PEYTON-FITZ, Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Fred Carvin: I move the following correction be made to line five of the resolution to read as follows: The applicant complies with the required minimum 20 foot setback on the east side of the property. I would grant the applicant 20 feet of relief on the northwest side of the property, providing a 10-foot side setback, and also grant relief of 20 feet from the combined sideline setbacks. Duly adopted this 19th day of October, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Maresco, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE MR. TURNER-Okay. We've got to correct the K-Mart resolution. The relief on the K-Mart resolution, where he said 599 square feet, let see, the proposal calls for a total of 599 square feet, which is a variance of 212.07 square feet, and the relief should be 302.83, because the sign that was on the building, the Super K, with the 24 Hour on the bottom, well they went around the Super and around the "K", and underneath like this, and that's not the way we do it. We square it up, and go square, and I think it saves everybody a lot of problems. The 9 by 50.66 equals 455.94. The total is 700. The total square footage is 742.83. MR. MARTIN-So the 599 changes to 742.83? MR. TURNER-Right. Yes. ~1R . MARTIN-Oka>' . MS. CIPPERLY-And then the 212 changes to. MR. TURNER-Yes. I did that. Okay. So I ' 11 make that a motion. MOTION TO AMEND SIGN VARIANCE NO. 53-1994 RESOLUTION, Introduced by Theodore Turner adoption, seconded by Chris Thomas: K-MART CORPORATION who moved for its Where he said 599 square feet, proposal calls for a total of 599 square feet, which is a variance of 212.07 square feet, and the relief should be 302.83. The 9' by 50.66 equals 455.94. So, the total square footage is 742.83. Duly adopted this 19th day of October, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Maresco, Mr. Ford, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE ABSTAINED: Mr. Carvin MR. TURNER-Betty, did you want to say something? MRS. MONAHAN-Betty Monahan, Queensbury Town Board. I was asked - 50 - ',-- . '---" by two of my constitutents to inform you, relative to the Bleibtrey application from the Zoning Administrator's determination, that two letters were faxed in to the Office today and were not made a part of the record. So I wanted to make you a\o>Js.re that some place there's tJ...JO letters floating around. MR. TURNER-Okay. All right. MR. MARTIN-They are in the file. MR. TURNER-Are there two letters in the file, Chris? MR. THOMAS-For which? MR. MARTIN-For Bleibtrey's appeal. MR. THOMAS-I don't even have the folder for the Bleibtreys. MR. TURNER-You know why we didn't read them. Betty, because we didn't get that far. MR. THOMAS-We haven't had the folder. MRS. MONAHAN-Okay, because they were concerned, and I said I would. MR. TURNER-Okay. Just tell them they're in the file, and we will read them. Thank you. Any other business? Okay. I'll move that the meeting's adjourned. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Theodore Turner, Chairman - 51 -