Loading...
1994-12-21 L (~R I GIN ¡~ L QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 21, 1994 INDEX Area Variance No. 69-1994 Marguerite E. Eldridge Royce Eldridge, Sr. (POA) L ¡t)r e {J. \./ar iance i''''¡o. 71-1'::;194 {:ìrea \la~-iance No 72~<1994 Area Variance No, 65--1994 Jeffrey & Debra Godnick 5. G~- ace Robe~- ts 1'-;' -' . Ivtaureen' 1'1, L>'nch 15. 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 MI t\jUTES " J "--- QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 21, 1994 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT THEODORE TURNER, CHAIRMAN CHRIS THOMAS, SECRETARY Ff'~ED CARVIN FWBERT KARPELES THOi"'1AS F'ORD Df-'iV I D ¡"IEI\ TER MEMBERS ABSENT ,;NTHONY i'1ARESCO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-JAMES MARTIN PLANNER-SUSAN CIPPERLY STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI !'fEW BUSINE$.S: AREA VARIANCE NO. 69-1994 TYPE: UNLISTED SFR-1A MARGUERITE E. ELDRIDGE ROYCE ELDRIDGE, SR. (POA) OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE AVIATION ROAD BETWEEN BENNETT AND ELDRIDGE ROADS APPLICANT PROPOSES TO SUBDIVIDE AN EXISTING 1.46 ACRE LOT, MAKING A FOUR- TENTHS (0.4) ACRE LOT AND A ONE (1) ACRE LOT IN AN SFR-1A ZONE. SECTION 179-20, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES, REQUIRE LOT SIZE OF ONE (1) ACRE FOR THIS ZONE. ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR LOT DIMENSIONS CAN BE MET. TAX MAP NO. 83-1-12.1 LOT SIZE: 1.46 ACRES SECTION: 179-20 PAT TAYLOR, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 69-1994, Marguerite E. Eldridge Royce Eldridge, Sr. (POA), Meeting Date: December 21, 1994 "APPLICANT: Marguerite E. Eldridge, Royce Eldridge (POA) PROJECT LOCATION: Aviation Road between Bennett and Eldridge Roads PROPOSED ACTION: Applicant proposes to divide a 1.46 acre L-shaped lot, creating a 0.4 acre lot and a I acre lot. CONFORMANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE: Section 179-20, SFR-1A zone, requires lot size of one acre. The proposed parcel meets all other criteria for a building lot in the zone. REASON FOR VARIANCE REQUEST, AND BENEFIT TO APPLICANT: The owner is having financial difficulty, and has not been able to make tax payments on the property. Sale of a portion of the property would help the situation by reducing the tax assessment and creating cash flow for the owner. FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES: The only alternative 1S to divide the parcel on Eldridge Road, which has a small rental unit on it; and may not be as saleable. IS THIS RELIEF SUBSTANTIAL RELATIVE TO THE ORDINANCE? Applicant is asking for lot size approximately one-half the required size for the zone. EFFECTS ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMUNITY: It does not appear that there would be an adverse effect from the creation or development of this lot, particularly if access to the lot 1S from Bennett Road, rather than Aviation. Adjacent lot sizes are similar. IS THIS DIFFICULTY SELF-CREATED?: This is an unusual lot, in shape and by virtue of having frontage on three roads. The vacant portion along Bennett is not very usable by the house on Eldridge. PARCEL HISTORY: According to Assessor's records, the applicant owned a much larger lot in 1974, and lots have been divided off, over time. The residence was built in 1945. STAFF COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: This proposal appears to have the elements of difficult lot configuration, combined with a benefit - 1 - ......' -- -- to the senior citizen applicants, who are having a difficult time managing this size lot financially, but do not wish to have to sell their home. SECR: Unlisted" MR. TURNER-Would you care to add any points in your favor? When was the recent division of the property? When did they sell the last lot? MS. TAYLOR-He sold a lot on the lower end of Bennett Road, which wasn't even connected with that. He sold that about four years ago. i'1R. TURNER-The one way in the back? Me' -::> . TAYLOR-Way in the back. MR. CARVIN-Was that a one acre lot, do you know? MS. TAYLOR-I don't believe so. MR. CARVIN-This was about four years ago? MS. TAYLOR-Yes. MR. CARVIN-There wasn't any subdividing then? That was just a preexisting lot, was it? MS. TAYLOR-No. That was just a parcel, and he sold it. MR. CARVIN-Are you familiar with these other lots here? Are these owned by the applicant? MS. TAYLOR-No. They aren't owned by the applicant. 1'1R. TURNER-No, but I;Jere the>'? The>' !¿Jere, olrmed by him, though. MS. TAYLOR-That I don't know. MS. CIPPERLY-The ones on Bennett Road, most of them were owned by the applicant, but as I said, starting in 1974. MR. TURNER-Yes, most of those lots up in there are all small. MR. CARVIN-There has been nothing created since 1987? MF<. TURI"~ER-No, not to !!l.:l:::. knowledge. MS. TAYLOR-Actually, this lot would be bigger than those lots. MR. TURNER-Than those lots that are there, yes. MS. TAYLOR-So it would conform. MR. TURNER-If this would go through, does the problem with a condition that the entrance to Bennett Road rather than Aviation Road? applicant. ha\/G a the lot be from MS. TAYLOR-No, I don't think that would be a problem at all. I think the house would be, yes, would be facing Bennett Road, and t.hen it would conform with the rest.. MR. TURNER-Yes, and we wouldn't have another curb cut on. MS. TAYLOR-Maybe it would be a problem with someone who buys the Pì"OPEHty. MR. TURNER-Well, that might be a condition of the variance, that's all.. MS. TAYLOR-That would be the condition of the variance. Well, we - 2 - -../ "- could sell it with that condition, or advertise it. MR. TURNER-Anyone else have any questions? MR. THOMAS-The only thing that's been kicking through ~ mind is that's a col.lector road, Aviation Road is, and how does that apply to this? I was looking through the Ordinance, here, and it says if it's bordered by residential lots, well it doesn't apply. So does it have to be twice the normal lot width, or not? MR. TURNER-Sue, Jim, Chris has got a question for you. MR. THOMAS-Aviation Road is a collector road, between West Mountain Road and 1-87. MR. MARTIN-'les. MR. THOMAS-And lots on that road are required to be double the lot width. MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. THOMAS-Unless it's bordered by residential lots, according to the Ordinance. MS. CIPPERLY-It depends on, also, whether you figure it's fronting on Bennett Road. MR. TURNER-Which way they're going to front it. question. That "'Jas mz MR. MARTIN-Yes. If they front it on Bennett Road, then that would not be the case. Mf·L THCJlVIAS-Then it has, in 179"30.1 that "the definition of a front, rear. and side yard, notwithstanding where a lot is bounded by two roads, any front yard or side requirements set forth in this Chapter shall be met on both abutting roads." MR. MARTIN-Right. yards. You can have two front yards and two rear MR. THOMAS-So, that means the front yard would appear on Aviation also? Mf~. TURNER··Yes. MR. THOMAS-And it would need double the lot width? MR. MARTIN-I would say. You'd need relief from other thing we were kicking around is, I think, on the remaining lot, there with the house, apartment above a garage. that also. The two dwelling lots I guess, and an MS. Tf'1YLOR-That's just a little bungalow. ¡'1~) . CIPPEF~l_ Y"wlt's like a camp. MR. MARTIN-Okay. As long as it's not a complete dwelling unit. Otherwise, because the Code requires a minimum lot of two acres in size for more than one dwelling unit. 1,1R. TURi\jER-Yes. MR. MARTIN-If that's not classified as a dwelling unit, then that's not a concern. Well, if it's a complete housekeeping facility. Does it have a bathroom, kitchen and living area? MS. TAYLOR-I've never been inside it. It's more like a little garage that's been made into an efficiency apartment, but it's - 3 - -' <- sma 11 . MR. MARTIN-If it's a stand alone housekeeping facilities, then it's, uni t,. dwelling unit with by definition, a its OIrJTl dwelling MS. TAYLOR-One woman lives there alone. MR. CARVIN-Has that always been the case? preexisting? Would this be MR. TURNER-Yes. It's preexisting. MR. MARTIN-Yes, because even before the proposed subdivision, it didn't meet that requirement. Even before the subdivision that's proposed, it didn't meet the two acre lot size. MR. MENTER-So we don't need to address that question, then. MR. MARTIN-Well, it's a preexisting situation. MR. TURNER-The lot width is 150 feet, isn't it? MR. MARTIN-Yes, in SR-IA, so 300 feet, but again, even the preexisting lot didn't meet that requirement, at 239 feet. MR. TURNER-No, and there's no other place he can go. what he's got, and that's aLL he's got. He's 90t MR. MARTIN-I think he would need a variance in order to subdivide it, for the lot width. I think you'd have to give him relief from that. MR. TURNER-Yes, you would, because that fronts collector. Chris is right. Okay. Anything else? Do you have anything else you want to add? Aviation, a All right. MS. TAYLOR-No, I guess that's it. MR. TURNER-Okay. Let me open the public hearing, then. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TURNER-Discussion? MR. CARVIN-I don't have any real problem with this. MR. TURNER-I don't have a problem with can do. He's limited. I was 90ing to and he had a brand new situation, with size, then I'd have a problem with it. it. There's nothing he say, if it was out there, lots that were of one acre MR. CARVIN-Our Area Variance criteria is granted the benefit to the applicant a9ainst the detriment to the health, safety and welfare, that's not a problem. IV¡R. TURi'''¡ER-No. MR. CARVIN-Undesirable change ln the nei9hborhood, that doesn't seem to be a problem. MR. TURNER-That's not a problem. MR. CARVIN-Benefit sought by the applicant could be reached by another feasible method, that doesn't seem to be a problem. Is it substantial, not really, I guess. Adverse impact on the - 4 - '- _./ physical or environmental conditions in district? Again, it doesn't seem to be, time you subdivide it's a self created. the neighborhood or and self-created, any MF~. TUPNER-Yes. MR. CARVIN-I think he has substantial benefit to move ahead, here. MR. TURNEP-All right. I'll accept a motion, then. MR. MENTER-We need to address both variances, right? MR. TURNEP-Yes. Frontage on a collector road. width. Double the lot MR. THOMAS-179-30. MR. CARVIN-Do we have to address that now, or addressed if the lot is sold to the new applicant, to come in for a building permit? can that be if they have MR. MARTIN-It would have to be addressed now, because this is going to have to go to the Planning Board for subdivision. MR. THOMAS-What about the environmental assessment? MR. TURNER-We've got to address that, if the motion is carried. MOTION TO APPROVE AREfl_y'ABIANCE, NO. 69-1994 MARGUERITE ,.~,_.,. ELDRIDGE,_ROYCE ELDRIQGE-ÍEQl0, Introduced by Fred Carvin l>Jho moved for lts adoption, seconded by Theodore Turner: The applicant is proposing to divide a 1.46 acre L shaped lot, creating a 0.4 acre lot and a 1 acre lot. In order for the applicant to undertake this proposed division, they would need relief from Section 179-20, which requires a lot size of one acre. I would move that we grant .54 acres relief from that Section. The applicant also needs relief from Section 179-30 which deals with frontage on a collector road, where the frontage has to be double the lot width. I would, again, move that we grant relief of 184 feet from that particular Section. By the granting of this Area Variance, the benefit to the applicant, which would allow her to sell the vacant lot in order to pay taxes, as weighed against the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community would be minimal. There would not be an undesirable change in the neighborhood, or any detriment to the nearby properties by the granting of this Area Variance. There does not appear to be any other feasible method for the applicant to accomplish their goal and it would appear that this is the minimum variance necessary and adequate to protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. I would also add that any curb cuts for this lot will come off Bennett Road and not Aviation Road. The review of the Short Environmental Assessement Form indicates a negative declaration. Duly adopted this 21st day of December, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Turner [",jOES: 1'\jONE ABSENT: Mr. Maresco AREA VARIANCE NO. 71-1994 TYPE I WR-1A CEA JEFFREY & DEBRA GODNICK OWNER: SAME SOUTH SIDE OF GLEN LAKE ROAD THIRD HOUSE EAST OF DOCKSIDER REST. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE A PRE- - 5 - ~ - - EXISTING NONCONFORMING TWO STORY CAMP AND CONSTRUCT A NEW TWO- STORY HOUSE ON THE PRE-EXISTING, NONCONFORMING LOT. SECTION 179- 60, REQUIRES A SEVENTY-FIVE (75) FOOT SHORELINE SETBACK, APPLICANT IS PROPOSING FORTY-FIVE (45) FEET. SECTION 179-7 LIMITS GARAGE SIZE TO NINE HUNDRED (900) SQUARE FEET, APPLICANT IS PROPOSING NINE HUNDRED SIXTY-FOUR (964) SQUARE FEET. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) 12/14/94 TAX MAP NO. 38-4-6 LOT SIZE: 0.44 ACRES SECTION 179-7, 179-60 STEVE JAGER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 71-1994, Jeffrey & Debra Godnick, Meeting Date: December 21,1994 "APPLICANT: Jeffrey and Debra Godnick PROJECT LOCATION: Glen Lake Road PROPOSED ACTION: Applicant proposes to remove a pre-existing nonconforming 2-story camp and construct a new 2-story house on the pre-existing, nonconforming lot. CONFORMANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE: Section 179-60 requires a 75-foot shoreline setback. Applicant is proposing 45 feet. Section 179-7 limits garage size to 900 square feet. Applicant is proposing 964 square feet. REASON FOR VARIANCE REQUEST, AND BENEFIT TO APPLICANT: Variance would allow applicant to have a larger home without having to move, and would provide a garage. FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES: Applicant's agent was advised to consider alternative design with regard to the garage, possibly incorporating storage or stairway into the house rather than the garage. IS THIS RELIEF SUBSTANTIAL RELATIVE TO THE ORDINANCE? The 64 sq. ft. garage variance does not appear significant if there are no feasible design alternatives. The 45-foot shoreline setback is an improvement over the existing situation, where the setback is 30 feet. EFFECTS ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMUNITY: It appears that this would be an improvement over the existing dwelling, and may improve lake visibility for the property to the east. The height may increase visibility of the house from the lake, but is conforming. IS THIS DIFFICULTY SELF-CREATED?: This difficulty stems from the pre-existing lot size more than anything else. PARCEL HISTORY: The existing house was constructed in 1930. The applicant purchased it in August, 1994. STAFF COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: It appears that the applicant has done a careful job designing a house that fits all but one of the setback requirements. It is recommended that the project be required to provide on-site runoff retention, for instance, gutters, possibly drywells, etc., to protect Glen Lake. SEQR: The garage size is an Unlisted action in a Critical Environmental Area, therefore a Type I. Since the ZBA is the only involved agency, a SEeR determination could be made without the 30-day review." MR. THOMAS-"At a meeting of the Warren County Plan Board, held on the 14th day of December 1994, the above application for an Area Variance to construct a single family dwelling with attached garage and walkout basement, was reviewed and the following action was taken. Recommendation to: Approve Comments: With the condition that the on-site roof drainage is terminated to an on,wsite drywell." Signed by Thomas Hale)/, Chai rperson . MR. JAGER-Steve Jager. MR. TURNER-Why can't you bring the garage down to 900 square feet? MR. JAGER-The original design was 900 square feet for the garage, initially, we had thought that would be the inside dimension for the net area of the garage. The way it's designed, the inside of the garage is 900 square feet, and include the perimeter thickness of the exterior wall, it would be 964 square feet. MR. TURNER-Why can't you reduce it? What's the reason you can't reduce it to 900, and conform? - 6 - --/ '--- MR. JAGER-Additional storage space. MR. TURNER-You haven't built it, yet. MR. JAGER-No, but the vehicle sizes that he's going to be putting in there, for instance, a pick-up truck with a snow plow. MR. TURNER-A snow plow's only, what's a snow plow, eight feet? MR. JAGER-In width. In length, the truck, he has a large suburban, a vehicle that's approximately 21, 21 and a half feet long. The depth of garage, out to out, is 28 feet. The inside dimension is approximately 27 feet. That would allow easy access around the vehicles, since it will be a three car garage. Anything less, you'd have to go outside to open the doors to get inside, to use the vehicles. So I try to allow just simple access to the garage. MR. TURNER-The length of the vehicle's, what, with the plow? MR. JAGER-The length with the plow, I think the plow is about three, three and a half feet out. MR. TURI\ ER-t\!o. Try maybe tJ:LQ feet. MR. JAGER-Full plow extension? MR. TURNER-Full plow. MR. JAGER-You're talking, if the vehicle is 22 feet, and the trailer hitch in the back, in the front with the plow, that leaves, approximately, two feet on each end, not even two feet on each end, inside, just a foot and a half to walk by either end of the vehicle, which, to me, is enough to get by, but when you get down to 12 inches on each end, then you're kind of close to the front wall, kind of close to the back wall. I'm trying to minimize the damage. MR. TURNER-Yes, I know, but the snow plow is only going to be on in the winter time. MR. JAGER-But it's going to be stored ln the garage, instead of on-site. MR. TURNER-Yes. Well, with the size of the lot and the size of the house, I don't have a problem with the rest of it, but I certainly think you can compromise and come down the 900 square feet, and not seek relief on the 900 square feet. MR. JAGER-The other reason we have, if you look at the site plan, you'll notice that the garage that faces Glen Lake Road has a step in it, and that's a design element, trying to break up the size of the garage. A three car garage is a large structure. By breaking up that facade with a small protrusion, it helps the character, it helps the design of the building. MR. TURNER-Well, you know, that's really not the criteria for the extending the garage, making is 964 square feet. As an architect, you can do anything with a pencil. MR. JAGER-Well, that's true. The Ordinance really specifies three car garage and we thought at the time we did the Ordinance in '88 that it was more than adequate. Now everybody's coming with, and they want bigger garages, and I think they're a burden on the property, and they're unsightly sometimes, and I, for one, sticking with the 900 square feet, because this is a brand new building. This is not something that you can't correct right nOI¡.J. MR. CARVIN-Is there any problem squaring that off? - 7 - >- - MR. JAGER-I probably wouldn't square, I'd still like to have a Jog, but I could probably re-dimension it. MR. FORD-That protrusion does, in fact, account for most of that 64 feet. MR. TURNER-Yes. That's what we're saying. MR. JAGER-In the Code, it doesn't specifically state whether it's gross square feet or net square footage. MR. TURNER-Well, that might be, but 900 square feet is 900 square feet. MR. CARVIN-Also, you're indicating 45 feet back from the lake, is that con-ect? ~m. JAGEF~--Yes. MR. CARVIN-I mean, we've run a quick measurement, and we come up wi th ;,5 Oì" 56. MR. JAGER-For the actual house, but there's actually a deck on the front, an extra 10 feet. MR. TURNER-It's not shown here. Where is it? MR. JAGER-It's very light. i'1R. TURNER--Yes. Okay' . Now I see it. Yes. He just dotted it out. MR. JAGER-It's a very light deck. The deck would go about 2/3rds the length of the house. The house itself is setback further, but any structure has to be within the setback. was looked at the other the way house, if you had it drawn, you you didn't look at it MR. TURNER-Yes. almost thought it that close. You MR. KARPELES-But look at this driveway. the middle of the driveway? Is there an island in MR. JAGER-That's what we're proposing right now. MR. KARPELES-There's no problem with permeability here, lS there? i"lR. TURNER--No. i"lF~ . CAF~vn,j--No . pC3rcent. It looks like they're going to be about 90 MR. THOMAS-The dimensions you give for that garage, are they the outside dimensions? i'1r~. JAGER-Yes. MR. THOMAS-I can only come up with 952 square feet. MR. JAGER-That 14 foot in the front, (lost word) 17 foot. MR. THOMAS-Okay. So that would add another 12 onto it. ¡VIP" Ji~Gt:R-Right. MR. 11ENTER-I think I have to agree with Ted. I like the placement of the house. I think the setback, to me, is not a problem, because it's an improvement and it's a nice design, but I don't see any compelling reason to give a variance on the size of the garage, in this case. - 8 - ~ '- MR. THOMA5-I agree with him. Bring the garage down to 900. MR. TURNER-All right. Okay. Let me open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. MARTIN-Any consideration given to the drainage, a dry well or eaves trenches or anything like that employed? MR. JAGER-I want to handle all the water runoff, increased runoff, post runoff with dry wells. It'll have to be done at the higher elevations, because the south side, which is the lake sido. MR. TURNER-Do you have a design of the house yet? MR. JAGER-Pretty much, yes. MR. TURNER-Do you have it with you? MR. JAGER-I didn't bring the sketch. MR. MARTIN-Because I need to see, Ted, the dry well location and cross section detail for building permit anyhow. i'1f~. TURNEF<-Yes. MR. FORD-How does that building height, at 35 feet, compare with the existing structure? MR. JAGER-Existing is probably about 23, 24 feet high, and we'll probably go, with the chimney and stuff, probably right to 35 foot on the lake side. MR. JAGER-This is just a real early, preliminary, of what the house looks like. MR. TURNER-Any changes since then? MR. JAGER-Yes. We've gone, this is, originally, a one story on Glen Lake side, a two story. The owner preferred a two story solution. So there's been a change on this side, the right hand side, but the front. MR. TURNER-Remains the same. MR. FORD-Which really appears as a three story unit? MR. JAGER-On the lake side. MR. MARTIN-What is the square the living aroa, as opposed to footage, then, of the old? the nelrJ house, MR. JAGER-The living area of the new is. MR. MARTIN-Because when L last saw this, it was the one story on the road story, and two story on the lake side. This is the first I've heard of the two story and the three story. 50 now what's the resulting floor area, in comparison? MR. JAGER-The floor area is virtually tho sarno in the one story. We have not changed it. It's about 5,000 square feet. MR. MARTIN-Well, the reason why I asked is because the Code has a 50 percent expansion before you then, you trip another need for. - 9 - ~ -- MR. JAGER-That's only when it's a rebuild, and we're not ¡-ebui ldi n9. MR. MARTIN-That's true. Okay. MR. TURNER-Just as lon9 as they brin9 the garage down to 900 square feet. MR. JAGER-That includes the basement, the 5,000 square feet. MR. TURNER-The living area is 5,000 square feet, is that what you said? MR. JAGER-Well, the totally square footage of that house, living and basement. MR. FORD-The basement isn't a part of that living space? MR. JAGER-I'm not sure the actual definition of that livin9 sp2i.ce .. MR. FORD-I was wondering if your design at three stories would allow for that to be a part of the living space? MR. JAGER-They may build a family room or something downstairs. Currently, it's going to be basically open space. MR. FORD-Just a sealed wall? I"IR. JAGER-Yes. unfinished. Right now it's considered, it's going to be MR. TURNER-Okay. Lets move it. Do you agree to drop the garage to 900 square feet? That's not inside. That's outside. MR. JAGER-That's outside. MR. TURNER-Okay. MR. CARVIN-Do we have to mention the Warren County? MR. Yes, but I v.Jell, TURNER-Yes. We can make that a condition of the variance. I think we should. That'll go to site plan review anyway, think we ought to incorporate it into the motion, the dry the on-site dry well. MR. MARTIN-Yes. I'd like to see locations of the dry well. MR. TURNER-Yes, but I think we're going to incorporate in the motion the recommendation of the Warren County Planning Board, that there will be on-site dry wells. Then they can deal with it at the Planning Board. MR. MARTIN-Well, this won't be going to the Planning Board. MR. TURNER-It won't, not for site plan? MR. MARTIN-Because we're not altering an existing structure. MR. TURNER-Okay. MS. CIPPERLY-You can suggest that if you want to. You have that in your power to send it. MR. TURNER-I think a house this the Planning Board. This is a should look at it. size on Glen Lake should go to huge house, and I think they MR. MARTIN-I don't have any problem with that. - 10 - ~ ~ MR. TURNER-It's a nice house.rhere's nothing wrong with it, but I'm just saying, it's a huge structure, and we have a lot of problems with property on the lake. MR. MARTIN-Any problem locating your septic system? MR. TURNER-No, they're going to use the old one. MR. JAGER-The pre-existing is actually larger than what. MS. CIPPERLY-I think it's three 1,000 gallon tanks right now. MR. JAGER-Three 1,000 gallon. MR. MARTIN-How about the separation distance from the lake, with the? MR. JAGER-There's no problem there. MR. TURNER-I think it ought to go to the Planning Board. MS. CIPPERLY-You can do that in a is you could table it, send it opinion, and get it back, or the site plan review. couple of different ways. One to the Planning Board for an other is to send it for actual MR. TURNER-I think right at this point I'd make a motion to send it to Planning Board and let them look at it and give us a recommendation, and then we'll table it until we hear from them. MR. JAGER-What would be the reason for going to the Planning Board? MR. TURNER-I just want them to look at it. I'd feel more comfortable with them looking at it. That's a huge house. You've got a little less than half an acre here. It's right on the lake, too. MOTION TO TABLE AREA VARIANCE NO. ßODNICK, Introduced by Theodore adoption, seconded by Fred Carvin: 71-1994 JEFFREY Turner who moved & DEBRA for its To move the application to the Planning Board and table it until we hear back from them. We would like them to look at the on site drainage, permeability, visibility from the lake, get input from them and have it come back to the ZBA. Duly adopted this 21st day of December, 1994, by the following vote: MR. CARVIN-Are we referring it for site plan, or do we just want an opinion? MR. TURNER-We can do it either way. We can get a recommendation from them, or you have them run it through site plan. MR. MARTIN-It's going to amount to about the same thing. My understanding what you're looking for is an opinion on the drainage, make sure we have proper design and have Rist-Frost review that? MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. CARVIN-The County has stipulated that it has to have an on- site roof drainage terminating in an on-site dry well, but suppose it doesn't do that. Where does that leave us? I'm not saying it can't, because I don't know. MR. i 'f MARTIN-Yes, you'd you had a plan need, probably, I would say, an that didn't have that. You'd override, need that - 11 - '-' majority plus one. MR. TURNER-Well, no. íecomrnendation. They approved it. They just made a MR. MARTIN-Yes. but if you had an appíoval that didn't include that íecommendation. "1R. TURNER-Yes. MR. MENTER-Well, the other option would be for us to approve it contingen~ upon review and apPíoval by the Planning Board. MR. TURNER-Yes, right. MS. CIPPERLY-But the difference is a matter of the applicant having to file the site plan review application, which means preparing another whole application, and another fee, another public hearing. If you send it to the Planning Board fOí a íecomrnendation, it's a lot simpleí. MR. TURNER-It's a lot simpler, and we'll get the same answer. MR. MENTER-In the interest of expediency, that makes more sense. MR. TURNER-Yes. We'll get the same answer. So that would be my motion. MR. FORD-Just a question. drainage? Will that on-site include the roof MR. TURNER-All of it. MR. FORD All of the drainage on site? i'1F~. TIJRi\1EF~-'Yes. i'1F~. CARVH'~--That 's in conjunction vJlth War'ren Count,.'s request for the dry wells. i'1F~. TIJRI\!ER--Yes. MR. MARTIN-The Planning Board's used to looking at that type of a thing all the time. MR. TURNER-Yes. Also, the next time when you díawings of the house. It's nice to look at a it's a lot betteí to see what's going to be there. corne, br i ng )/01,..1 r plot plan, but Okay. AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Menter, Mr. Kaípeles, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Turner ~WES : I''-IONE ABSENT: Mr. Maresco MR. MARTIN-Just so the applicant knows, if we could receive your design on the stormwater drainage system by next Wednesday, it would be helpful. I know there's a holiday in there, so we'll wOík with you on that, if you need an extra day or two, but we're looking for all your calculations and all that, given a varying storm event, and we use Rist-Frost as a consulting engineer. They'll be reviewing that. The person's name there is Bill MacNamara, and what I advise applicants to do is, as much as you need to correspond with him, prior to the Planning Board meeting, so we go into that meeting with all his concerns addressed, I recommend that. Just keep me in the loop. In other words, any correspondence you send to him should come through OUí office, and then we'll distribute it out, and the way we can treat this is we'll get you on the first Planning Boaíd meeting in January, - 12 - ., .--./ so you'll be able to make the Zoning Board meeting in January, and we can have that report back, so we won't hold this up any further, and if you have any further questions, Just give the Planning Office a call, but it would be by next Wednesday, and if you need a day or two beyond that, let me know, and the last thi,ng is, the engi neeì- i ng fees, the cost of the FÜst-Frost review is passed through. It would be, I think, fairly nomimal in this case, but I did want to alert you to that. I have your consent for that, right, because one time I got caught on this. I would say you're looking at anywhere from $100 to $200 tops, on something like this. MR. TURNER-Do you agree? I'iP. JAGEP--Yes. JEFFF~EY (;ODNICK i"1P. GODI'\ IU(··Yes. ¡viR. TUF!.I'-!ER--O kay . AREA VARIANCE NO. 72-1994 TYPE: UNLISTED SR-1A GRACE ROBERTS OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE NORTH SIDE OF HAVILAND ROAD AND EAST OF MASTER'S COMMON NORTH, WEST OF FAIRWAY COURT APPLICANT PROPOSES TO SUBDIVIDE A 2.73 ACRE LOT WITH TWO EXISTING HOUSES ON IT INTO TWO LOTS, EACH WITH ONE HOUSE. THE PARCEL IS SITUATED ON HAVILAND ROAD, WHICH SECTION 179-30 DEFINES AS A LOCAL ARTERIAL ROAD, THUS REQUIRING DOUBLE THE LOT WIDTH. BOTH LOTS MEET ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONES, SECTION 179- 19, BUT SEEK RELIEF FROM SECTION 179-30. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) 12/14/94 TAX MAP NO. 46-1-7.1 LOT SIZE: 2.73 ACRES SECTION 179-30 MARTIN AUFFREDOU, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 72-1994, Grace Roberts, Meeting Date: December 21, 1994 "APPLICANT: Grace Roberts PROJECT LOCATION: north side of Haviland Road and east of Master's Common North, west of Fairway Court PROPOSED ACTION: Applicant proposes to subdivide a 2.73 acre lot with two existing houses on it into two lots, each with one house. CONFORMANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE: The proposed lots are conforming with respect to Section 179-19, Suburban Residential zone. Haviland Road is designated a local arterial road by Section 179-30, therefore double the normal lot width is required. REASON FOR VARIANCE REQUEST, AND BENEFIT TO APPLICANT: Applicant wishes to subdivide the property, so that each house has its own lot. FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES: There do not appear to be any alternatives which would not require the same variance. A common driveway would negate the need for the variance, but does not appear desirable to the applicant. IS THIS RELIEF SUBSTANTIAL RELATIVE TO THE ORDINANCE? The required average lot width for the zone is 150 feet. Both proposed lots exceed that. Doubling the lot width means a 300 foot average lot width, per lot. The westerly proposed lot has an average lot width of 270, the easterly has an average width of 181 feet. EFFECTS ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMUNITY: Since nothing will change as far as number of access points, there will be no impact on the neighborhood. The purpose of designating arterial roads is to minimize curb cuts, and there will be no change. IS THIS DIFFICULTY SELF-CREATED?: Having the two houses on the same lot is a situation that has existed for many years. PARCEL HISTORY: The brick home was built in 1840, the wood frame in 1890. The property has been in the Roberts family for generations. STAFF COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: According to Assessment records, the acreage is 2.51 acres. The map supplied with the application was prepared by a licensed surveyor and shows 2.73 acres, plus/minus. - 13 - --- "-" SEaR: Type I I" MR. THOMAS-"At a meeting of the Warren County planning Board held on the 14th day of December 1994, the above application for an Area Variance for a two lot subdivision that will not comply with required amount of frontage on an arterial road. was reviewed, and the following action was taken. Recommendation to: No County Impact" Signed by Thomas Haley, Chairperson. MR. AUFFREDOU-Mr. Chairman, Members, my name is Martin Auffredou. I'm an attorney with the Bartlett, Pontiff law firm. Also present tonight is Mr. Robert Singer, right behind me to my left. Mr. Singer is Grace Roberts' son-in-law, and just so you know exactly what's going on here, what Grace proposes to do is to subdivide this property into two lots, and to deed the smaller lot, which contains the wood structure, over to Robert and his wife Debbie, and they plan to live there, along with their two children. So the benefits to Grace, I think, are the following: Number One, she would be relieved, somewhat, of a tax burden, here. Also, she would have the benefit of having some very close relatives and grandchildren live right next door. We agree with Staff entirely, here, that this really will not pose any detriment to the community or to the neighborhood. It does seem that this would be the minimum variance necessary to alleviate the hardship. We did discuss with Staff briefly the idea of a shared driveway. The problem there is that these two separate driveways have existed for a long, long time, and I think that it would be more in keeping with the character of the neighborhood to keep them separate. We've got a lot, we've got a significant amount of frontage. Unfortunately, not enough. We do feel that one important point is that we do exceed, at least, 150 feet of frontage for each lot. We realize that it's an arterial road. We realize that we need 300 of average lot width. We're not quite there, but in light of the fact that this property is virtually surrounded by the Golf Course, there is some subdivision property that neighbors really don't think that this will have too much of an adverse impact on the neighborhood. MR. MARTIN-This was originally submitted under a subdivision clause, in Section 178, and that's when we this little snafu, here. two lot ì-an into MR. TURNER-Yes. Does anyone have a question? MR. THOMAS-It makes sense to me. MR. TURNER-There's nothing you can do. don't have a problem with it. Okay. Iv:? a ì- i ng . What's there is there. I Let me open the public PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TURNER-Do you want to move it? MOTION TO APPROVE AREA Introduced by Theodore seconded by Fred Carvin: VARIANCE NO. Tur ner IrJho 72-1994 moved for GRACE its ROBERTS, adoption, This is to grant the applicant relief from Section 179-30, which defines Haviland Road as an arterial road, thus requiring double the lot width. Both lots meet and exceed the Suburban Residential zone in acreage. Both lots, although have existed as one, now wish to be subdivided. Therefore, since there's no other property in the area to purchase and to extend the frontage on Haviland Road, the hardship is unique. This would be the minimum variance to alleviate the difficulty to the applicant - 14 - --/ ----- caused by the terms of Assessment Form shows no the Ordinance. neqati\/0 impact. The Short Environmental Duly adopted this 21st day of December, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Ford, Mr. Turner t··KJE S : I'\)ONE ABSENT: Mr. Maresco OLD__eUSINESS :... AREA VARIANCE NO. 65-1994 TYPE II SR-1A MAUREEN M. LYNCH OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE RIDGE ROAD, NEXT TO AND BEHIND CRISLIP'S BED N' BREAKFAST APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON A LANDLOCKED PARCEL AND SEEKS RELIEF FROM SECTION 179-70, WHICH REQUIRES THAT EVERY PRINCIPAL BUILDING BE BUILT UPON A LOT WITH 40 FEET FRONTAGE UPON A PUBLIC STREET. (APPROVED BY ZBA ON 11/30/94). (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) 5/11/94 AS PER PREVIOUS APPLICATION AV 26-1994 FOR ALBANY SAVINGS BANK/C. LYNCH TAX MAP NO. 55-1-7.21, 7.1 LOT SIZES: 1.14 ACRES, 7.21 ACRES SECTION 179-70 CHRISTOPHER LYNCH, PRESENT MR. TURNER-Read the tablinq. i'1R. THOI'1¡'~S···IIThe Queensbury Zonin9 Board of Appeals has revielrJed the following request at the below stated meeting and has resolved the following: Variance File #65-1994 for an Area Variance is tabled "MOTION TO_TABLE AREA VARIANCE NO. 65-1994 MAUREEN M. LYNCH, Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Fred Carvin: So that the parties involved can maybe work out an agreement, and will be on the aqenda for one week from today. Duly adopted this 14th day of December, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Maresco, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Turner i····WES: NONE A8SEt'H: Mr. l'1enter II ::;,i gned b~/ Th'80dor e Tur ner . MR. TURNER-Okay. Mr. Lynch. conversation with Dr. Garner? Have wlì.'3.t's the you r e.s.c hed 'result of your an agreement? MR. LYNCH-Succinctly, I have good news and bad news. I believe we're within 24 hours of reaching an agreement that would satisfy any requirements with the 40 foot right-of-way. We should have it si9ned by tomorrow afternoon. I have copies of the proposed agreement, if anybody's interested in looking at them. I think, in concert with Dr. Garner, what we'd like to do is table this again, and again, I believe we're within 24 hours of siqning an agreement that would meet all Town requirements. MR. TURNER-Is that all right with you? We can do it next week, if you want us? MR. LYNCH-We'd definitely request that. MR. TURNER-We'll do it riqht up front. We have one issue in front of us, but we'll take yours first, under old Business. - 15 - - '-" MR. LYNCH-That I would extremely appreciate. MR. TURNER-The 28th. siGned, I Guess. Is They'll have their agreement drawn it Going to be notarized, or what? up and ANDREIrJ GARNER DR. GARNER-If we make an agreement, do we even need to come? MR. LYNCH-But we would specifically be here and let you know l.<Jhat's going on. MR. THOMAS-Wouldn't they need to withdraw the application? MS. CIPPERLY-They could do that in writing. MR. MARTIN-You could do that by virtue of a letter to the Board, withdrawing the application. I'm. L. '(I''\ CH··We ho¡:;;·efu1.1.y, to t.o havetl'''le s;v,¡ap, by ne:d. would be talking to have a contract signed closing, a land swap, Wednesday. Staff. We're looking, tomorrow, and we're looking a mutually beneficial land MR. TURNER-Yes. Just in case there's a hitch in the wagon, right, I want to put you on the agenda for next week, and if what occurs, what you're saying is going to occur occurs, then we won't hear you. You'll be off. Okay, but I just want you on so that we can get this thing resolved, if you have a problem. If you don't have a problem, you don't have to come. You can notify Staff that you've reached the agreement. They'll notify us, and we'll take you off the agenda. MR. MARTIN-I would need some sort of written request to be removed from the agenda. MR. TURNER-Yes. It's got to be a written request. MAUREEN L. YNCH MRS. LYNCH-Can that be faxed in? MR. MARTIN-Yes, that would be fine, but I need something in l.<Jr i t i ng . MR. TURNER-From both parties. Not one, both parties. MR. MARTIN-Yes. In light of this, I would like some confirmation from Dr. Garner that, by the way, I tried calling you several times today. There was no answer every time. So I did try to return your call, but I would like some, I'll call you and make sure everything's all set on your end, too. MR. TURNER-But you're still on in case, okay. All right. Thank you. I'll make a motion to table. M01JON TO TABLE AREA VARIANCE Introduced by Theodore Turner seconded by Fred Carvin: NO. 65-1994 ~'-Jho moved MAUREEN fOì" its M. LYNCH, acJoption, Until December 28, 1994, pending the outcome of the confirmation from both parties, Mr. Lynch and Mr. Garner, as to the resolution of the problem that confronts them. That resolution will be in writing and submitted to the Planning Department and agreed to by both parties. Duly adopted this 21st day of December, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, - 16 - -/ "--- . Mr. Thomas, Mr. Turner t···jOES: I'-,JONE ABSENT: Mr. Maresco CORRECTION OF MINUTES July 20, 1994: NONE MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES Theodore Turner who moved for Carvin: OF _..J.UL Y 20, 1994, Int. r oduced by its adoption, seconded by Fred Duly adopted this 21st day of December, 1994, by the following \/otl.:3: AYES: Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, IVli". Turner" I'WES: j'-,JONE ABSTAINED: Mr. Ford ABSENT: Mr. Maresco July 27, 1994: NONE MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES Theodore Turner who moved for Ca r v in: OF JULY 27. 1994, Introduced by its adoption, seconded by Fred Duly adopted this 21st day of December, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Thomas, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, ¡VIr. TUi-ner I····K) E:::':; : 1"1 Qt-.j E ABSTAINED: Mr. Ford ABSENT: Mr. Maresco August 17, 1994: Page 8, down at bottom, third line up, Mr. Turner, bottom part of paragraph, the road bisects sIb his property, not your property; Page 8, first Mr. Karpeles down; I looked at it, but when I looked at the map, I don't see why you couldn't come up along the, where is that?, cross out from "I" to the end of the paragraph; next Mr. Karpeles, and come up, cross out "and", ma.ke "come" the first word, come up and create anotr'ler tlwee acn?":; on that othor side of tho road., CíOSS out the "and" and say, "it ¡"'Jould" not bother ¡/ou any; Page 16, from bottom up, first Mr. Karpeles, you know I travel, sIb tíavelled; Page 31, Mr. Karpeles, middle of page, well, it should be addressed in an Ordinance, but at the present time, there are so few bed and breakfasts that, cross off "if"; MOT.ION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 17. 1994 Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for seconded by Robert Karpeles: AS CORRECTED, its adoption, Duly adopted this 21st day of December, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Tur ner ijOE':;:,: i\~ONE - 17 - - -' ABSTAINED: Mr. Ford ABSENT: Mr. Maresco August 24, 1994: Page 28, second Mr. Karpeles from top, so how big of a garage would you be, sIb so how big of a garage would you not object to; Page 23, first Mr. Menter from top, I would say the issue is less running the business than storage of business related, trade related tools; second Mr. Menter should read, because you're an electrician, you don't work at home like ¡,au say.; MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 24. 1994 Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for seconded by David Menter: AS CORRECTED, its adoptio)"ò Duly adopted this 21st day of December, 1994, by the following \/ote :: AYES: Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin. Mr. Thomas, Mr. Menter, Mr. Tu)" ner ¡",WE S : ¡'~ONE ABSTAINED: Mr. Ford ABSENT: Mr. Maresco September 21, 1994: NONE MOTJON_ TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 21. 1994, Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Fred Ca r \/ in: Duly adopted this 21st day of December, 1994, by the following \/ote :: AYES: Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Menter, ¡VIr. Tu)" nør ¡\WES : ¡''-lONE ABSTAINED: Mr. Ford ABSENT: Mr. Maresco September 28, 1994: Page 17, first Mr. Karpeles down, she was an øntirely difførønt casø, she wantød a placø, cross out "to", a place to store two cars, and she had an alternative. She could have storød the two cars in that housø rønovation, then cross off "she could have built an addition on there"; Page 23, motion to deny, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that a reasonable return sIb "is not" possible M01JON TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF CORRECTE~, Introduced by Theodore adoption, seconded by David Menter: SEPTEMBER TlO" ne)" who 28 . 1994 moved for AS its Duly adopted this 21st day of December, 1994, by the following v()t.e: AYES: Mr. Carvin, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Tu)"ner r"jOES: HONE ABSTAINED: Mr. Ford ABSENT: Mr. Turner - 18 - -./ '~ October 11, 1994: Page 26, which we denied at the last meeting, regarding Faith Bible Church, strike sentence out, I don't think that there's sufficient justification for re-hearing it, and it appears that there is an alternative that he has mentioned himself that can be done which is to put a gate up there; cross off "i t" afteì· that; ~OT~ON TQ.APPROVE THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11. 1994 Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for seconded by Thomas Ford: AS CORRECTE;Q_, its adoption, Duly adopted thIS 21st day of December, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Ford, Mr. Turner NOES: 1'· ot·\IE ABSTAINED: Mr. Menter, Mr. Carvin ABSENT: Mr. Maresco MR. TURNER-Is Paul going to have us a decision whether Bliebtrey has any standing or not? I've talked to him, I don't know, a few weeks ago, and he hasn't gotten to it yet, and she called me, and I told her it was still up in the air until we receive something from him. MR. MARTIN-I think any sort of pressure to get him to do that is going to best come from you. i"1F(. TUF~r"ER--IrJhat about l'1art5 nds.le? WrhEne did t·hs.t a¡:::·peal 90? MR. MARTIN-He submitted documentation in the form of written statements by people and signed, that they had bought vegetable products and produce there throughout the 1980's. MR. TURNER-He bought that when? MR. MARTIN-1986, I think. MR. TURNER-Well, they couldn't have bou9ht vegetables through the 1980's, if he didn't own it until 1986. I'll tell you what, when we had the hearing that time, on that appeal, he brought slips in where he ~3howed when? he had sold some blueberT ies, after he owned it, but previous to that, there was nothing there but just the cows and I think he father farmed it. I know there were cows in the pasture. MR. MARTIN-Well, Paul's been talking to his attorney.' I 9uess it's Mike Cusack. That would be another good one to ask Paul about, because that's been referred up to him. MR. TURNER-He's got that one too? i'm. 1'1¡:;RTHj·-Yes. MR. TURNER-Okay. Anything else? MR. CARVIN-Will we be informed on the lynch? MR. TURNEF:,·Yes. MR. MARTIN-Yes. I should have a report for you next week, as to what happened with that. MR. CARVIN-As lon9 as it's in compliance with Ordinances, I guess it really doesn't matter. the TOv-Jn ¡'1f<. TURi'jER-No. - 19 - - -- 1'1P. ".lith MARTIN-Well, they're showing 40 foot of frontage on a survey tl'lat agreement. MP. TURNER-Yes. I was going to tell you guys, the other night the Garners called me and they said they had talked to Mr. Lynch and that they had offered them a proposal and they said that they would give them 40 feet if he gave them 2 acres. I can tell you right now, I'm glad it's not me, because I said, I wouldn't buy it either. So I guess between that conversation and tonight, they worked it out. MP. MARTIN-That whole thing went awry back when the Lynches got their construction mortgage on that first lot, and why Albany Savings Bank Just arbitrarily carved off two and a half acres or 2.8 acres. MP. TURNER-Money. i'1F:. CI~R\/H~·wI thi nk 1'1r. L.ynch, that l-<Ja.S a lot that he developed back. MP. TURNER-He carved it out himself. MR. CARVIN-He carved it out. Albany Savings Bank didn't carve anytJÜ n<;) out. n"lat ' s l-<Jhat he. presented to them. MP. TURNER-He carved it out and said, here, you know. MR. MARTIN-Yes, but then the Bank, then, should have done a title search. Why did they accept security on only 2.8? MR. CARVIN-The deed was filed. That's all the title search explores, but the Bank didn't know that they had a problem until the)" (;ame here in May'. That's 0lL feeling, that they didn't know they had a problem, and once they found out the problem, I think they sold that piece of property just as quick as they could. MR. FORD-At best, it was a compromise. At worst, he carved it out himself. MR. CARVIN-No. I think it's established that he carved. MR. TURNER-He subdivided it himself. MR. CARVIN-Chris Lynch, he did it himself. ¡YiR. TURr'\IERw-Yes. far as it l-<Jent. He filed the deed at the County, and that's as MP. MARTIN-Well, that's since changed, July 1st of this year. The County now has to have a report from the applicant that local approval has been ascertained. ¡VIR. TURNER-Y'es. MR. MARTIN-I mean, that's State law now. MR. TURNER-Yes. That'll help a lot. Before you go, I got a call from Betty Monahan in respect to the Town Board wants to rotate the Chairmanship to the Boards, and she asked me to talk to you qUY:3 about 1 t . MR. THOMAS-Why rotate it? MR. TURNER-I don't know. MR. THOMAS-That doesn't make sense, to me. MR. TURNER-The Town Board, according to state law, the Town Board appoints the Chairman of the Planning Board and the Town Board - 20 - J '-----' appoints the Chairman of the Zoning Board, and I haven't seen anything correcting it, but the Chairman of the Zoning Board is appointed by the Town Board for his term. If he starts out a new term, and they appoint you as Chairman, you fill that out until the end of your term. The Planning Board can elect their own Chairman, but the Town Board has to approve it. That's the difference. We're a separate entity. We're separate from any other 130aì"d. MR. MENTER-Okay. So what was the issue they brought up? MR. TURNER-They want to rotate the Chairmanship. MR. KARPELES-Do they want to rotate it, or do they just want him to be elected? MR. TURI\jER-i"'~o. yeaì" . They want to rotate, rotate or elect him, every MR. KARPELES-Well, I mean it makes a difference. You could be re-elected, but if we have to rotate, then you couldn't be Chairman again. So it does make a difference, but are they going to send us something in writing? MR. TURNER-No. It's just wanted some input from us. in the talking stage, and they just So I don't know how you guys feel. MR. THOMAS-No way. MR. FORD-I'm a neophyte on it, and I can't see an advantage to rotation. MR. THOMAS-I think we'll lose continuity doing that. MR. TURNER-Not only that, but I think you're going to have people say, nuts, I don't want to serve on that Board. They're going to kick us around like a rubber ball. MR. THOMAS-Yes, the Town Board would be gaining control of us. I'1R. TURt"EF~-Ye~3. MR. THOMAS-And we want to stay independent of them, as far as we can. i"lR. TUF;NEF;,"I;Je §re i ndep.;:?ndent, lIJhether they knollJ it or not, lIJe are. MR. CARVIN-I was going to say, didn't they have a problem back, with the Planning Board, because they had to turn down? MR. THOMAS-Yes, they did. MR. TURNER-Carol Pulver was elected by the Planning Board to be Chairman, and the Town Board did not approve her appointment. She asked me to raise the issue, so I raised it. MR. CARVIN-I'd like to see, if they're going to raise the lssue,. I'd like to see something documented. I mean, what's the issue? I don't understand what the criteria lS. MR. TURNER-Who's rocking the boat? MR. FORD-Ted, what's the procedure now? MR. CARVIN-As for the term, what's the criteria? MR. TURNER-When they appoint, I have a letter home, and there's a letter here on file, but there's a resolution by the Town Board that when they re-appointed me to my term, that I was re- - 21 - -- --' appointed as the Chairman, and that's their prerogative. My term doesn't expire until 1996, and that would be Oecember of '96, because my term is mid year, May. So now you serve until the end of the year. Your term doesn't get cut off in mid stream. MR. MENTER-I think I rationale, some stated di::;ô:cussion on. agree with Fred. There must be some rationale here that we need to base our MR. CARVIN-I mean, if your term ends in 1996, as Chairman, the Town Board decides not to re-appoint you, then we would to elect a new Chairman. and ha\/e IvIF. n.JFNEF-·They would have to. I'm. Cf~F~VH'~-'The(' lI-Jould have to, but agai n, I don't know whe'íe the ground rules are. 1'1F;; . KAF~PELES'-{1r e they say i ng they wa nt it thr Oll-Jn into our ha nds , to elect a Chairman? MR. TURNER-No. You can't do that. That's State law, that the Town Board has to appoint the Chairman, that's State law. MR. CARVIN-Then what are they basing their annual election on? MR. TURNEF-I don't know. Somebody's raised the Issue. Maybe somebody's not happy on the Planning Board and wants to be the Chairman, or whatever. I don't know, or maybe they're not happy with whoever the Chairman is now. I don't know what their Issue IS, but I think that's it. MR. KARPELES-Tell them we're happy. MF. TUFNER-Okay. I'll convey the message. MR. FORD-If there's an issue we ought to be addressing, let them bring it. MR. CARVIN-Yes, or a criteria we should be following. I mean, ~;hot'" us. MR. TURNER-Well, you know, I looked it up in the book, and that's what it says, and it's in that "All You Want to Know About Zoning". It's right in tr'¡i¡3re. MF. CARVIN-What's that. 1t goes with the term then, right? MR. TURI'··~ER-Yes. MR. MARTIN-I think that's consistent with State law. ~:;ure about that. I'm riot. MR. TURNER-That is State law, and even in that new red book that you've got downstairs, the new one on the State statutes, it's right in there. i'1R. M?)RTI N'-Yes . Zoni n(.) Boan:!. It IS different for the Planning Board and MR. TURNER-And like Chris says, it would raise hell with continuity. You'd have an awful mess. MR. THOMAS-Sure you would. I'm. TURNER-O kay . afte," Ch,' istmas. So other than that, I guess we're done until Wf:) ',"e adjourned. On motion meeting was adjourned. - 22 - ~ RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Theodore Turner, Chairman ,J - 23 -