Loading...
2010.09.15 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 15, 2010 INDEX Area Variance No. 46-2010 Mary Matte 2. Tax Map No. 315.6-2-54 Area Variance No. 47-2010 Mary Matte 6. Tax Map No. 315.6-2-54 Area Variance No. 48-2010 Sam Wahnon 12. Tax Map No. 309.18-1-43.2 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. 0 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 15, 2010 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT JAMES UNDERWOOD, CHAIRMAN RICHARD GARRAND JOYCE HUNT BRIAN CLEMENTS JOHN KOSKINAS, ALTERNATE MEMBERS ABSENT ROY URRICO JOAN JENKIN LAND USE PLANNER-KEITH OBORNE STENOGRAPHER-SUE HEMINGWAY MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. I’m going to call the September 15, 2010 meeting of the Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals to order, and starting out I want to quickly go through our procedures, once again, for anybody that perhaps is new here. As we handle each application I’ll call the application by name and number. The secretary will read the pertinent parts of the application, Staff Notes and Warren County Planning Board decision if applicable into the record. Then we’ll ask the applicant to present any information they wish to present to the Board. The Board will ask questions of the applicant, and then we’ll open the public hearing. The public hearing is intended to help us gather information and understand it about the issues at hand, and it functions to help the Board members make a wise decision. It does not make the decision for the Board members. There will be a five minute limit on all speakers. We will allow speakers to speak again after everybody’s had a chance to speak, but not for more than three minutes, and only if after listening to the other speakers, a speaker believes that they have new information to present, and, Board members, I’d suggest that because we have the five minute limit that we not interrupt the speaker with questions while they’re speaking. Rather we should wait until the speaker has finished his five minute period and then ask the questions. Following all the speakers, we’ll read in any correspondence into the record, and then the applicant will have an opportunity to react and respond to the public comment. Board members then will discuss the variance request with the applicant. Following that, the Board members will have a chance to explain their positions on the application, and then the public hearing will be closed or left open depending on the situation, and finally, if appropriate a motion to approve or disapprove will follow. We’ve only got a few things to do tonight, but I’ve got to do a little bit of administrative stuff here, because we did get some correspondence, and I think what I’ll do is we received a letter from Inwald Enterprises, and they have requested to be tabled to October 2010. So I don’t know which one. MR. OBORNE-I would wait until next week. That’s when they’re scheduled to be heard. So I’d just wait for that. MR. UNDERWOOD-Just wait and do that then? Okay. Meredith Kerr, that one, shall I wait on that one, too, then? MR. OBORNE-That is going back to the County at this point so. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. Maybe just for public information, so you guys know what’s happening with that one. I don’t know if you remember this one. We just did this one last month, and the Kerr one we turned down that variance. So we did receive a letter, and should I read this in, do you think? MR. OBORNE-Well, what specifically happened is you gave them a choice to withdraw, and they took that choice. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. MR. OBORNE-So they were tabled. MR. UNDERWOOD-They withdrew. We tabled them, and in essence, the letter, everybody’s gotten a copy of this anyway. 1 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) MR. OBORNE-They were distributed tonight. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. If you guys will read your letters, that way it’ll save Sue from having to re-type them into the record again, but in essence that letter talks about the history of that neighborhood. That was that very small lot that they wanted to subdivide, and we, it didn’t seem like the Board could muster enough votes for them to allow that to happen, and I think a lot of that was based upon the fact that the County had given it a negative declaration. So we had to have like a super majority of the Board members that wanted to vote for that. So they’re going to go back to the County, I guess. Are they appealing to Craig on this, too? MR. OBORNE-Yes. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. So that’ll be based upon Craig’s decision whether he allows that, because since it’s already been to the County, and they didn’t appear before the County on the night that the item was on the agenda they got turned down. MR. OBORNE-Right. They are, to a certain extent, getting a second chance at the County, and the only way that the County can review it is if Craig refers it to the County, and I think he’s leaning towards that direction. MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes. Okay. So I guess we’ll just wait and hear on that one, and we’re not going to worry about that until we hear back from them when we see them. MR. OBORNE-Yes. I believe they were tabled to October. I think you gave them two months. MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes. I think we gave them until October. So it may not show up until November if they’ve got to go back to the County. MR. OBORNE-Right. MR. UNDERWOOD-All right, and the other one was Sicard’s was coming up in the next little bit here, too, and we got a letter, and this is to Keith. It says, as relayed by phone message, we nd would like to table the Sicard variance application from the September 22 meeting to the last meeting in October. The family has directed us to look at alternatives and we will submit new th information on or before September 15 deadline for the October meetings. Did they get it in today? MR. OBORNE-No. It should say they’re going to get it in in October for November at this point. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. All right. So should we just wait until next week? MR. OBORNE-I would wait until next week also, only because there should have been a letter in there from Mike O’Connor asking that also, not Mike O’Connor, I’m sorry, Tom Jarrett. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay, and it’s not going to matter, because we’re just not going to hear them next week. MR. OBORNE-That’s correct. MR. UNDERWOOD-As they were on the agenda. MR. OBORNE-And we’ll clean everything up, as far as those applications go next week. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. Good. NEW BUSINESS: AREA VARIANCE NO. 46-2010 SEQRA TYPE: II MARY MATTE OWNER(S): MARY MATTE ZONING: SR-20 YR. 1990 SUB. APPROVAL LOCATION: 11 GOLDFINCH ROAD – INSPIRATION PARK APPLICANT HAS CONSTRUCTED A PORCH. RELIEF REQUESTED FROM MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. CROSS. REF.: BP 2010-312; SUBDIVISION NO. 14-1990 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING: N/A LOT SIZE: 0.23 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 315.6-2-54 SECTION: 179-3-040 MARY MATTE, PRESENT STAFF INPUT 2 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 46-2010, Mary Matte, Meeting Date: September 15, 2010 “Project Location: 11 Goldfinch Road – Inspiration Park Description of Proposed Project: Applicant has constructed a 180 square foot front porch within the frontline setback of Inspiration Park subdivision. Relief Required: The applicant request 5 feet on front setback relief from the 30 foot front setback requirement for the SR-20 zone requirements for Inspiration Park. Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law: In making a determination, the board shall consider: 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. With the structure completed, feasible methods appear limited. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The request for 5 feet or 17% relief from the 30 foot front setback requirement for the SR-20 zone for Inspiration Park may be considered minor to moderate relative to the ordinance in place in 1990. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor impacts on the physical and environmental conditions of the neighborhood may be anticipated. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self created. The difficulty may be considered self created. Parcel History (construction/site plan/variance, etc.): AV 47-10 Detached garage Pending BP 2010-325 768 sq. ft. detached garage Pending BP 2010-312 180 sq. ft. deck Pending SUB 14-1990 42 lot subdivision approved 9/30/92 [Ph. 1]; 10/27/92 [Ph. 2] . Staff comments: The applicant has requested a waiver from the survey requirements and was granted by the ZBA Chair on September 3, 2010. SEQR Status: Type II” MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. Anything you want to add? I would just comment, like the photograph that Keith has up there is pretty appropriate. It shows, it’s pretty much in line with every other house on the street there, and the 30 foot setback is from the property line, not from the road. So remember that you’re going to add on that eight or ten feet out there probably even more than that, you know, out to the actual. MS. MATTE-It’s a five foot. MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes. Anything you want to add? I mean, the house is up and done. MS. MATTE-The yard and the porch? Not really other than I’ve gotten several compliments on it. MR. UNDERWOOD-Well, and I think in most instances on these small lots, you know, a lot of them don’t bother to put a porch on the front, and I’m sure afterwards they’re like kicking themselves saying I wish I had a porch to sit on, you know, and then they have to come in for a variance later on because the house was sited that way, and in this instance here, you know, it’s 3 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) five feet of relief, which is pretty minimal, from the 30 foot plus, if you take into account the setback from the actual road right of way and the Town right of way in front of there. It’s still going to be about 30 feet out to the pavement out there I would guess. Do you guys want to make any comments at all? Any questions? MR. KOSKINAS-Did you ever get a building permit? MS. MATTE-No, I didn’t. I did not realize I needed one. I had to replace the shingles on my roof. MR. KOSKINAS-Yes, I read that. MS. MATTE-So, when I. MR. KOSKINAS-You could have just thrown the garage on then, I guess. MS. MATTE-No, I knew I needed one for the garage. MR. OBORNE-There is a building permit in-house right now. MR. KOSKINAS-For what? MR. OBORNE-For that already constructed porch. MR. KOSKINAS-So the building inspectors never went there? MR. OBORNE-Correct. MR. GARRAND-Have they been there to check the footings and everything? MR. OBORNE-Not yet. MS. MATTE-Well, one of them actually did stop, one of them. MR. OBORNE-They did come out? So Dave’s already got them out there then at this point. MR. GARRAND-It looks like you’re mirroring what was done in the house next door. MS. MATTE-Yes, similar. MR. GARRAND-Did they get a building permit? MR. OBORNE-I couldn’t tell you. MR. KOSKINAS-Who built the porch? MS. MATTE-Friends, and the guy next door and then a couple of other guys he hired. I don’t know their name. I don’t know the other guy’s name. MR. KOSKINAS-I saw the relative to your other request, 47, that your neighbor’s going to build your garage. Is that it? He built the porch? MS. MATTE-Yes. MR. OBORNE-And, Rich, not to be flip with the response to what you said. Typically I look at this myopically, at this application, and it’s really beyond what I do, as far as, you know, neighboring properties. If I see something that’s egregious, then, yes, I mean, I’ll say something, but if there’s nothing there, I’m not going to go pulling out files looking for stuff like that. One would hope. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. If you guys don’t have any questions, I guess I’ll open up the public hearing. Anybody from the public wishing to speak on the matter? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. UNDERWOOD-Did we have any kind of correspondence? MR. GARRAND-I don’t see any correspondence in the folder regarding this application. 4 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. I would just finish up my comments by saying, you know, it’s a pretty minimalist porch. It’s pretty narrow. It’s not like it’s some grandiose, giant, you know, hacienda around the whole thing. So, I don’t know what you guys think. Brian, I’ll start with you. MR. CLEMENTS-Yes. Since everybody isn’t here tonight, I’ll say a few things that maybe some of those people might have said. One is that I know that this Board does not like giving variances after the fact. With that said, I would say that this is a pretty modest porch. I can see where, you know, you might have thought that you didn’t need a building permit for this. So I would be in favor of it, with what I said. MR. UNDERWOOD-John? MR. KOSKINAS-Well, because it’s up, I’d be in favor of it now, but I’ll tell you that it’s a risky bit of business when you go putting things on your house and it hasn’t been inspected. Building inspectors aren’t, you know, around to pester people, but you want to be sure when you attach something to your house, that you have adequate footings, that it’s attached properly, the sill boards are correct, and it’s going to not deteriorate your home over time, but add value to it, and if you had gone for a building permit which, I hope anything else you do, you do, they would have correctly told you about the variance requested. It just makes people feel better when you honor the, and it’s not just your home. Someday that’ll be somebody else’s home, if you sell it, and you want to be sure that there’s value in it for them as well, and that’s one of the things that this Board does is try and look long term, and that’s what the building inspectors are trying to do as well. MR. UNDERWOOD-Rick? OWEN MATTE MR. MATTE-Can I ask a question? MR. UNDERWOOD-You’ve got to come up to the microphone. MR. OBORNE-If you could state your name for the record, sir. MR. MATTE-I’m Owen Matte. I’m Mary’s father. I live with Mary, and my questions is, why was it allowed, the permission that was granted to build these houses? They only allowed, they allowed 30 foot from the edge of the road. Am I correct? MR. UNDERWOOD-Well, everybody is always under the impression that it’s from the edge of the road, but the right of way’s around Town, depending on what kind of a street and what kind of a roadway they are, have varying additions on them, in case they ever want to widen the street or put a sidewalk in. I’m sure that’s the main reason for doing it, but they, a lot of people, in the past, we’ve had other small, on these lots where people have measured back 30 feet from the pavement, and set their house, put their foundation in, and then they have to come in and get relief for that, and, you know, we don’t really have a system of checks and balances other than most contractors are savvy enough to know that they’ve got to, you know, look it up and see what the setbacks is. MR. MATTE-But they have an allowance. On these houses there are five foot porches on some of these houses, just a poured concrete porch with a roof over it. That’s why I was, I’m concerned. It’s the only reason I’m asking the question. Because they have built, they have put five foot of concrete out there where they could get out their door and go down their set of stairs. MR. UNDERWOOD-Sure. Like I know a stoop is at least required by Code before you have your three stairs coming down to the lawn or sidewalk. MR. MATTE-Okay. The only reason I’m asking is because I was just concerned because they allowed that, and that’s why we were ignorant of the permit. That’s why wasn’t aware. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. Rick? MR. OWEN-Thank you. MR. GARRAND-It’s not a big change. The relief is pretty minor, and in answer to your question, a lot of these houses were built on quarter acre lots, and they were pretty much shoehorned in. They wanted to allow for a backyard, a septic system and all that stuff. So a front porch was pretty much an afterthought. MR. MATTE-Okay. Thank you for your time. I just had to ask the question. Thank you. 5 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) MR. GARRAND-And I don’t think the relief is significant. I don’t think it’ll affect the neighborhood in any adverse way. So I’d be in favor of it. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. Joyce? MRS. HUNT-Yes. I have to agree. I think it’s, the request is minor, and it would be minor impacts on the neighborhood and physical and environmental conditions. So I would be in favor. MR. UNDERWOOD-And as I said before, I’m not really concerned with it, either. It’s just a matter of, you know, make sure, you know, everybody in Town needs to realize that they need to get a building permit, no matter what they want to do, or at least ask first before, you know, we’ve had people do major projects that were in the wrong place, and I don’t think we made anybody tear anything down, but I know it’s happened in the past. So, you know, if somebody really gets their dander up about it, it can happen, but in this instance we’re usually willing to look the other way on it. So, does somebody want to make the motion on this one? MRS. HUNT-I’ll take it. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay, and I’ll close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 46-2010 MARY MATTE, Introduced by Joyce Hunt who moved for its adoption, seconded by John Koskinas: 11 Goldfinch Road – Inspiration Park. The applicant has constructed a 180 square foot front porch within the front line setback of Inspiration Park subdivision. The applicant requests five feet of front setback relief from the 30 foot front setback requirement of the SR-20 zoning requirements for Inspiration Park. In making a determination, the Board shall consider whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of this Area Variance, and I feel that minor impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible to the applicant to pursue other than an Area Variance? The porch is up, so no other feasible methods available. Whether the requested Area Variance is substantial? The request for five feet or 17% relief from the 30 foot front setback requirement of the SR-20 zone for Inspiration Park is considered minor to moderate relative to the Ordinance. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. I think there will be minor impacts on the physical and environmental conditions of the neighborhood. The difficulty may be considered self-created. I move that we approve Area Variance No. 46-2010. th Duly adopted this 15 day of September, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Clements, Mr. Garrand, Mrs. Hunt, Mr. Koskinas, Mr. Underwood NOES: NONE AREA VARIANCE NO. 47-2010 SEQRA TYPE: II MARY MATTE OWNER(S): MARY MATTE ZONING: SR-20 INSPIRATION PARK SUBD. YR. 1990 LOCATION: 11 GOLDFINCH ROAD – INSPIRATION PARK APPLICANT PROPOSES CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED GARAGE. RELIEF REQUESTED FROM MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. CROSS REF.: BP 2010-325; SUBDIVISION NO 14-1990 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING: N/A LOT SIZE: 0.23 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 309.18-1-43.2 SECTION: 179-3-040 MARY MATTE, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 47-2010, Mary Matte, Meeting Date: September 15, 2010 “Project Location: 11 Goldfinch Road – Inspiration Park Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to construct a 768 square foot detached garage on a 0.23 acre parcel in Inspiration Park Subdivision. Relief Required: Applicant requests 5 feet of east side setback relief from the 10 foot setback requirement for the SR-20 zone requirement for Inspiration Park Subdivision. 6 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law: In making a determination, the board shall consider: 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The applicant could build an attached garage and possibly avoid an area variance. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The requests for 5 feet or 50 percent relief from the 10 foot side setback requirement for the SR-20 zone for Inspiration Park may be considered moderate relative to the ordinance in place in 1990. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Moderate impacts on the physical conditions of the neighborhood may be anticipated as the property to the east has an existing garage located along the property line. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self created. The difficulty may be considered self created. Parcel History (construction/site plan/variance, etc.): AV 46-10 180 sq. ft. deck Pending BP 2010-325 768 sq. ft. detached garage Pending BP 2010-312 180 sq. ft. deck Pending SUB 14-1990 42 lot subdivision Approved 9/30/92 [Ph. 1], 10/27/92 [Ph. 2] Staff comments: It should be ascertained what the resulting space between the existing garage on the parcel to the east and the proposed garage by the applicant. According to the Director of Building and Codes, there must be a minimum of 6 feet between each structure. The applicant has requested a waiver from the survey requirements and was granted by the ZBA Chair on September 3, 2010. Type II” SEQR Status: MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. So this is the plot of what you want to do, and it looks to me like you’ve got the garage attached to the house. Is it going to be attached to the house? MS. MATTE-No, that was the original. MR. UNDERWOOD-That was the original. MS. MATTE-Yes. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. MS. MATTE-And actually I would need a variance even if I attached it because they didn’t leave us a, when I had those plans drawn up, they still didn’t leave the 10 foot. MR. UNDERWOOD-How much of a gap is there going to be between the garage and the house, Keith? MR. KOSKINAS-Four and a half feet. MR. UNDERWOOD-I mean, don’t we have some standards on that, too? MR. OBORNE-Yes, to the property line, he needs six foot between each structure. 7 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) MR. UNDERWOOD-But for a detached garage from the house, it’s own house, that it’s? MR. OBORNE-Well, it needs to be six feet, if it’s not my understanding, and I’m not in Building and Codes, my understanding is you have to upgrade the fireproofing, something along those lines. MR. UNDERWOOD-You’ve got to put sheet rock, fireproof sheet rock. MR. OBORNE-I believe you have to do that anyway with a garage. MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes. MR. OBORNE-But I’m not exactly sure, to be honest with you. MR. UNDERWOOD-But I think it’s only attached to the side of the house, you know, directly attached. MR. KOSKINAS-Can I ask why you don’t want to attach the garage to the house? MS. MATTE-Well, actually I’ve been kind of going back and forth with it, to be honest with you. MR. KOSKINAS-It would make your visit here a lot easier. OWEN MATTE MR. MATTE-Would it? In what way? MR. KOSKINAS-Well, if you, instead of asking for five feet, and I don’t know how far away the adjacent home’s garage is from the property line, but if the fence is on the property line, it’s very, very close. When you get within five feet of it, that’s a very close proximity. You’re asking for five foot of relief. If this same size garage were attached to the house, you’d be asking for half a foot. So instead of half the distance, you’d be looking at a fraction of the distance as a variance, and one of the things that, just so you know, New York State wants Boards like this one to grant the minimum amount of variance that’ll get the job done for you, and so we’re always thinking about that. I’m always thinking about that, at any rate. So here you’ve put a garage smack dab in the middle of your available space, and you’ve got a problem meeting Code between the house and the garage, and you want a variance from your adjacent property. You might want to re-think it. MRS. HUNT-Yes. I have a question. I mean, why didn’t you, I mean, this plot plan that was the original from the builder, they have it on the other side of the house. MR. OBORNE-Yes, they didn’t build a house to that specification. MRS. HUNT-Yes. It says future garage. Why are you not considering that? MS. MATTE-They had that on the other side of the house. MRS. HUNT-Yes. MS. MATTE-No, I don’t think so, because my kitchen and the door’s right there, and that’s why they flipped it. MR. MATTE-Her living quarters is. MRS. HUNT-I’m just saying, that’s what they had here, though, on the 33 foot side. It was the plot plan for Inspiration Park. MR. MATTE-From Inspiration Park, yes. MR. UNDERWOOD-I think one of the problems on these tiny little subdivision lots that we’ve gotten into in the past is because they always put the house dead center in the lot instead of skewing it one way or the other to accommodate future garages, you know. MR. OBORNE-Yes. They did in Inspiration Park. You can see it on the overhead. With the houses that do not have garages, they left spaces for them, for the most part, not all. Because some people are putting their driveways in on the other side where the garages should be going. So, I mean, there was a little bit of forethought. 8 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) MR. MATTE-Yes, but she has more on the right, on the other side, and that’s where the driveway is now. MS. MATTE-Well, I think maybe the original one, because that’s probably why when I told them about the garage, I flipped it. I mean, you wouldn’t want an attached garage when there’s no door or over there to get into the house. MR. KOSKINAS-And have you given thought to having a little bit smaller garage? Then you could make it, you wouldn’t have to come here. MS. MATTE-So you’re saying I need six feet between my house and the garage, or six feet between the other? MR. GARRAND-Between the structures. MR. UNDERWOOD-Between the garage and your house, if it’s going to be separate from your home, if it’s not going to be an attached garage, you’ve got to have six feet. MS. MATTE-Six feet? MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes, and I think that’s because of snow and things like that, too. That’s my understanding. MS. MATTE-I’ve seen several houses that weren’t six feet. So if I decide to go with the attached, do I have to come back, or can we do that tonight? MR. UNDERWOOD-You would only need. MR. OBORNE-You’d need less relief, so you’d be fine. MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes. I mean, we can give you less relief. It would only be half, like you said, the one foot. We can give you one foot of relief or something. MR. KOSKINAS-A one and a half garage, a one and three quarter car garage, would get you out of here easy. MS. MATTE-No, I need two. I’ll compromise maybe on the attached, but I’m not compromising, I need two. MR. MATTE-We need the 24 foot, because I’ve had garages, and you need 24 foot on a garage. MRS. HUNT-What is that window on your garage side? MS. MATTE-That’s a door, and that’s just an attic space, upstairs. Upstairs is just an attic space. MR. UNDERWOOD-That’s the south side of the house, though, I’m guessing. MS. MATTE-It’s to the left of the house. I don’t know if that’s south. MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes, that’s south. MR. OBORNE-I’d have to look at that plan there. MR. UNDERWOOD-It looks to me like you’re going to need 10 feet, right? MRS. HUNT-If you attach it? MR. UNDERWOOD-If you attach it. MR. OBORNE-I don’t know. According to this, yes, you wouldn’t need any relief. According to this, if you put a 24 by 24 foot garage on here, you’re not going to need any relief. MS. MATTE-I thought I needed like an eighth of an inch? MR. OBORNE-Well, the way you had it before was not detached. MS. MATTE-Right. 9 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) MRS. HUNT-Right. MS. MATTE-But I was going by the specs. MR. UNDERWOOD-Plus it’ll be easier to put it on there if you attach it. MS. MATTE-So then I have to submit new plans to the building? MR. UNDERWOOD-Well, I think the only difference, you’d have to show the wall that attaches to the house is going to have to be fireproof sheet rock. They’ll tell you what you need to do when you bring it in. MR. MATTE-Is that all? MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes. MR. MATTE-That would be the only change that she would need? MR. UNDERWOOD-I would imagine so. MS. MATTE-See, because this says 33.8. MR. OBORNE-Right, because she doesn’t have a survey, per se, an updated survey, and my suggestion is to give her one foot of relief with the knowledge that she’s probably not going to need it, but in case she does, she gets it. MR. UNDERWOOD-Sure. All right. That’s fine. MR. OBORNE-If the Board’s comfortable with that. It is less relief than what is being asked for right now. MR. UNDERWOOD-All right, and the only thing you’ll have to do is go back to the Building Department and explain the difference, that it’s now going to be attached. Dave Hatin will tell you what you need to do to bring it up to Code, and, you know, that should be not any big problem at all. MR. KOSKINAS-We’re going to grant relief, but not know what the structure is? MR. OBORNE-They’re attaching it to the house. You’re giving the applicant a foot of relief with the knowledge that it’s most likely less than that, and in fact it has to be less than that, because if it isn’t, she’s got to come back. It’s just a hedge, in this case, based on the information that we have before us, because we do not have a survey. MR. UNDERWOOD-Are you guys comfortable with that? MR. GARRAND-I went and looked at it yesterday, and my daughter brought up an interesting point. I told her that it was going to be separate from the house, and she said what happens when the snow comes off the roof and it piles up along the side of the house where the door is, and I said, I don’t know. MS. MATTE-You shovel, like you do now. MR. MATTE-Yes. MR. GARRAND-I have a teenager, they don’t shovel. MS. MATTE-Well, I do. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. So you guys are in agreement you’re going to attach the garage? MS. MATTE-Yes. MR. UNDERWOOD-That’s going to slide it over. So instead of needing the five feet of relief, it’s only going to need one foot of relief. We anticipate no relief, but that’ll give you a margin of error. MR. MATTE-So could we start the concrete work on it, with the attached garage? MR. OBORNE-Get your building permit in. 10 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) MR. UNDERWOOD-Go back and modify your building permit. MS. MATTE-Okay. MR. OBORNE-You’re going to have to modify your building permit if you haven’t given a building permit to Building and Codes. Now you have to modify it because you’re doing an attached garage. Now you’re dealing with fire code issues because of that, so they’ll tell you what to do. MR. MATTE-That won’t be a delay. That just goes with the inspector, is that what she has to do? MR. OBORNE-No, you’ve got to wait until you get your building permit before you do any concrete work. MR. MATTE-How long does that take? MR. OBORNE-Well, it depends on how long you can turn around your building permit. Have you given a building permit to Building and Codes? MS. MATTE-Yes, they already. MR. OBORNE-Okay. Well, you have to update that building permit now. And then after that, they’ve already looked at it, I’m sure it’s on hold right now awaiting these proceedings. So hop on in tomorrow and talk to somebody in Building and Codes and we’ll see where you’re at. MS. MATTE-Okay. Downstairs where I was before? MR. OBORNE-Yes, you’ve got it. MS. MATTE-Okay. MR. UNDERWOOD-Does somebody want to take this one? I’ll close the public hearing, then. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. MATTE-So there was no need for any variances at that point? MS. MATTE-No, they’re giving me one foot. MR. UNDERWOOD-No, we’re going to give you one foot. MR. MATTE-Giving me one foot? Okay. Thank you. MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 47-2010 MARY MATTE, Introduced by John Koskinas who moved for its adoption, seconded by Joyce Hunt: 11 Goldfinch Road – Inspiration Park. The applicant proposes to construct a 768 square foot attached garage on a .23 acre parcel in Inspiration Park. The relief requested. The applicant requests one foot of east side setback relief from the 10 foot setback requirement for the SR-20 zone requirement for Inspiration Park subdivision. In making the determination, the Board shall consider: One, whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of this Area Variance. Minor impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. Two, whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible to the applicant to pursue other than an Area Variance? The applicant, in building an attached garage, could possibly avoid an Area Variance, but we’re allowing one foot as an accommodation. Three, whether the requested Area Variance is substantial? The request for one foot, or 10% relief, from the 10 foot side setback requirement for the SR-20 zone for Inspiration Park may be considered moderate relative to the Ordinance. Four, whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor impacts on the physical conditions of the neighborhood may be anticipated. Five, whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. th Duly adopted this 15 day of September, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Garrand, Mrs. Hunt, Mr. Koskinas, Mr. Clements, Mr. Underwood 11 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Urrico, Mrs. Jenkin MR. UNDERWOOD-So, just a reminder, make sure you go in and get that modification done with your building permit. MS. MATTE-Okay. Do I need to bring something from here with me? MR. UNDERWOOD-I would go in. You could probably make a phone call and arrange to go in and talk to him. Maybe he can do it over the phone and he can advise you, but he’ll give you some, a notice on a piece of paper, I’m sure. MR. OBORNE-Right. What you may want to do is grab back some of these surveys that you have denoting the one that is attached. MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes, they’re not really surveys, but they’re plots. MR. OBORNE-You’re going to need to submit four copies to me of this. You’ll get a resolution. We’ll take care of you tomorrow if you come in tomorrow. MS. MATTE-Okay. So that’s what I’ll do. I’m come during lunch and talk to you. MR. UNDERWOOD-All right. AREA VARIANCE NO. 48-2010 SEQRA TYPE: II SAM WAHNON OWNER(S): SAM WAHNON ZONING: MDR LOCATION: BIG BOOM ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES CONSTRUCTION OF A 16 FT. BY 38 FT. MODULAR HOME ON VACANT PARCEL. RELIEF REQUESTED FROM MINIMUM FRONT AND SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. CROSS REF.: NONE FOUND WARREN COUNTY PLANNING: SEPTEMBER 8, 2010 LOT SIZE: 0.08 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 309.18-1-43.2 SECTION: 179-3-040 SAM WAHNON, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 48-2010, Sam Wahnon, Meeting Date: September 15, 2010 “Project Location: Big Boom Road Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to place a 1,216 square foot two story modular home on a 0.08 acre parcel adjacent to Big Boom Road. Relief Required: The applicant requests 6 feet of front setback and 15.5 feet of north and south side setback relief as per §179-3-040. Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law: In making a determination, the board shall consider: 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Lot limitations and the nature of the request preclude any feasible method other than an area variance. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The requests for 6 feet or 20 percent relief from the 30 foot front setback requirement for the MDR zone may be considered minor to moderate relative to the ordinance. The request for 15.5 feet or 62 percent relief from the 25 foot side setback requirement for the MDR zone may be considered moderate to severe relative to the ordinance. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor impacts on the physical and environmental conditions of the neighborhood may be anticipated. 12 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self created. The alleged difficulty may be attributed to the substandard nature of the lot. Parcel History (construction/site plan/variance, etc.): None Found Staff comments: The applicant has stated that the concrete and gravel driveway that is located on the parcel will be removed for the installation of the wastewater system and subsequently replanted in grass. Type II” SEQR Status: MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. Mr. Wahnon. MR. WAHNON-Yes. MR. UNDERWOOD-Did you acquire this property or is it something you’ve had for quite some time? MR. WAHNON-I bought the property four years ago. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. MR. WAHNON-Prior to me purchasing it, it was up for sale for four additional years, and I’ve had it for sale for four years, and nobody’s interested in a small parcel. MR. UNDERWOOD-All these original lots, this was a subdivision, or these were just lots that appeared at some point in time? MR. OBORNE-They’re lawfully nonconforming lots. MR. UNDERWOOD-Sure. MR. WAHNON-Prior to my purchase of the lot, I contacted the Town of Queensbury four years ago, my attorney did, to be sure that it was a valid building lot, and that, at that time I was told I would have to pursue variances, probably, for whatever I wanted to do. MR. UNDERWOOD-Sure. Okay. Do you guys want to ask any questions? Brian? MR. CLEMENTS-Yes. I have one from Keith. With this setback requirements sheet here, the side yard setbacks, it says proposed, are 15.5 feet. Shouldn’t that be 9.5? MR. OBORNE-Yes. MR. CLEMENTS-It should? Okay. MR. OBORNE-That is correct. MR. WAHNON-My survey shows 9.5. MR. OBORNE-Right. So the proposed, that’s the relief you’re giving is 15.5. It should say 9.5 there. That’s all right. MR. CLEMENTS-So, okay. So the relief required is 15.5? MR. OBORNE-Correct. MR. CLEMENTS-As it said on the Staff Notes. Yes, okay. MR. OBORNE-Yes, and that’s for both sides. MR. CLEMENTS-Right. MR. WAHNON-Now, Mr. Garrand has said that it is a 1216 square foot house and that’s true, but it’s a two story. So, each floor is only 608 square feet. So I’m occupying far less than 50% of the area, which is the Town Code. 13 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) MR. OBORNE-Yes, you’re not here for permeability relief. MR. WAHNON-No, but I just want them not to think that a 1200 square foot house is going there. It’s a 608 square foot house. It’s 16 feet wide by 38 feet long. So it fits nicely I guess is what my point is. MR. GARRAND-How are the people at 117 going to get back to their lot? MR. WAHNON-Well, they own that parcel. They just have driveway drifting toward my property, which has never been a big deal. Nobody’s lived there. Who cares? But once the property gets developed, and I believe they talked to the neighbor, Vanaperloo, and they said that they were going to just straighten the driveway out and run it to their lilac bushes. Because I talked to the Vanaperloo’s, who are the people to the right, or to the left of the property. MR. KOSKINAS-They own the lot adjacent to you? MR. WAHNON-I believe so. Their driveway goes right across it. MR. KOSKINAS-I know their driveway goes across it, but when I looked it up on the Town map, I didn’t read it that way. MR. WAHNON-Well, I don’t know, I don’t know how they’d get back to their, they’ve been getting back by how you can see. You can see their driveway that they put in. MR. KOSKINAS-I have a question. On your deed that you submitted, there’s a 200 foot line in the written text of the deed, but I don’t see it. MR. WAHNON-Well, when I bought the property, it’s strange that you mention that. When I bought the property, the frontage was supposed to be 85 feet by 200, and I guess that isn’t actually what it was, and there was an attorney involved, and they notified my attorney that his property was only 35 by 100. MR. KOSKINAS-If you went to the property marker on the northeast corner of the lot that the driveway’s on, that equals 85 feet. MR. WAHNON-I understand that, yes, but still and all, the survey speaks for itself. I just has this surveyed, okay, and the surveyor set all the pins, and it is, in fact, 35 by 100. Where the 200 came from, I can’t answer. I don’t have that answer. MR. KOSKINAS-In your deed. MR. UNDERWOOD-Any questions? So, Keith, are we going to run into difficulties with this property in the back being landlocked, then, where this other house already exists? I mean, they’re not going to have any way to get out except by helicopter? MR. OBORNE-They’re going to have to move their gravel drive, is my understanding. They own the land, Anable owns the land that the driveway’s on, and they also own the land that the driveway’s going to. MR. WAHNON-So they have access. I mean, it’s their land. They own it. Martin Anable. MR. GARRAND-One says Martin. One says Henry. Is it the same person or two different people? MR. WAHNON-My surveyor shows it as Martin Anable owning it, and this is an up to date survey. It was just done a month ago. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. Why don’t we open up the public hearing, because you guys probably want to come up and explain something here, because otherwise you wouldn’t be here. I’m going to open the public hearing. Anybody wishing to speak on the matter? Would you raise your hand? Do you guys want to come up? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MARTIN ANABLE 14 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) MR. ANABLE-I’m Martin Anable, the owner. On the driveway, that’s been there for years, that goes to the house. Isn’t there a right of way in there somewhere or is that just tossed away with the sale? MR. UNDERWOOD-I know we’ve had issues in Town before where people have had, you know, like, and I know they’ve gotten into legal issues over it, because if it’s an established driveway that’s been used, you know, since whenever, you know, I mean, pick a date. Right by use issues come into effect, you know, and I’m not sure, I mean, we can’t do anything about that as a Town, but, you know, that’s something that you can take up, you know, if you want to do it with an attorney or something like that, look into that, but as far as, I don’t know what you would want to do to work it out to their benefit or to your benefit, you know, something that you could mutually agree upon, you know, or if there’s some place else to move the driveway to. I mean, a lot of times on these little lots in Town, they’ve been there for years, they haven’t been used, and I think as we go forward, you know, a lot of people are going to be snapping them up, just because they’re the last place to build anything in Town, and, you know, it’s unfortunate that, you know, after all the years of use, you suddenly don’t have it anymore, and I know on my property I have a right of way on my property, you know, that was decided before I purchased the property, but the guy next door, that’s the only way he can get to his house over on Glen Lake is to come down my driveway, and it’s just something you’ve got to get used to. MR. KOSKINAS-This deed references a right of way. MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes. I mean, if it’s a legal right of way on the deed, you know, then I guess you can make an issue out of it, but it would seem like, unless the new house was going to be a major problem for you, that you could work something out to accommodate, you know, moving the driveway or whatever or doing something in that line of thought. I don’t know where you guys were headed with it, but, you know, it would be up to you. Right now, the primary access to that house in the back does occur over that driveway and has for many years I would assume, then. We could put that on the record as such, and I don’t know if you guys had any suggestion you wanted to make about it or your feelings about it, then. TONY JOHNSON MR. JOHNSON-Well, I’m Tony Johnson. I’m a neighbor. As far as I’m concerned, knowing that he would have to try to get a variance, this problem was kind of self-inflicted. I would have checked that all out before I bought the lot, and not only that, he’s trying to cram ten pounds of stuff into a five pound bag on that lot. You’re putting a 16 foot wide building that’s going to be two stories high, that’s going to look like an eyesore. MR. UNDERWOOD-And are you going to be affected by it? Because you live in the area? MR. JOHNSON-Just the value of the property. MR. UNDERWOOD-Sure. Okay. MR. JOHNSON-I don’t think it’s going to help the value of the property at all. MR. KOSKINAS-So is it correct that your home is the home in the back, 117? MR. ANABLE-Yes. MR. KOSKINAS-What’s your idea to get in that garage? How are you going to drive, if there’s a house here, how are you going to drive into your garage? MR. ANABLE-I’m not going to. MR. WAHNON-Come on. He owns the property. He’s got a driveway and he’s going to drive in to his garage the same as he does now. MR. KOSKINAS-Sir, thank you, but I really wanted to hear what he had to say. How are you going to, how would you make it past without driveway over a septic system and an easement to get here? MR. ANABLE-It wouldn’t work. I wouldn’t want the garage out in front, and if it was in the, I don’t think it would work. I’m just saying. MR. KOSKINAS-I walked it the other day, and I could not figure it out. 15 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) MR. UNDERWOOD-Who owns the little piece, you know, like you’ve got that big angled piece between the property, not to the Aperloo’s side, but the other side there, who owns that piece in there? Do you guys own that, too? MR. ANABLE-What piece are you talking about? MR. UNDERWOOD-Go back, Keith, to the general map. That one there, I don’t know if that would be the option to put the driveway over there because then you could come in the same way, you know, I mean, I was just thinking that might be the easiest way to do it, you know, it’s pretty narrow out there and you don’t meet the frontage requirements, right, Keith, on that? MR. OBORNE-Correct. MR. UNDERWOOD-And it’s separate lot, but I don’t know if, you know, it would be some reconfiguring if, somehow you’d have to get a variance on that I would imagine, right? MR. ANABLE-Another concern is how is he supposed to get a septic system into that, a proper septic system? MR. WAHNON-It’s all designed and meets Code. MR. GARRAND-It’s going in behind the house. MR. UNDERWOOD-Do you want to see it? Do you guys want to see a plot so you’ve got something to look at? I guess that would be the true flag lot back there, the way it is now. MR. GARRAND-Question for you. Sir, was any effort made at making a deal with the Anables for say, you know, making a deal and getting some of this property from them? To expand this? I mean, we’re looking at feasible alternatives here. Were any explored? MR. WAHNON-The property has been for sale from the prior owner, Gebo, who happens to be a Town employee, and Connie and her husband had it for sale for four, five years. Nobody bought it. Then I bought it and put a for sale sign up on it. MR. ANABLE-Knew nothing about it. I would have bought it. MR. WAHNON-And his attorney contacted me saying you don’t have 85 feet, you only have 35 feet. So I said okay, and I moved the for sale sign over onto 35, after that argument was resolved and they were proven right, and so it’s been for sale. If they wanted to buy it, they could have called me and made an offer. I guess what they felt was that I would never do anything with it. Therefore they’d grab it in taxes or something. I don’t know what their thinking or what their methods are, but, except for the side setbacks which in my opinion are minor, I’ve seen this Board grant more of a setback than this. I meet all the Codes for the Town. The building does not occupy even close to 50% of the lot. The septic system fits and works. It’s Town water. I’ve got a nice driveway, and it’s a modular home, not a double wide mobile home that is surrounded, and across the street is a concrete factory, plant. Down the road is a UPS warehouse. Across the street is Batease construction that has 1250 feet of frontage on Big Boom Road. So I don’t think I’m bringing the neighborhood down. I’m adding a $100,000 modular home to the neighborhood. MR. GARRAND-Conversely, did you ask to buy any of their property to increase the size of this parcel? MR. WAHNON-No. They were not friendly , no more then than they are now. MR. GARRAND-Okay. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. Keith, as far as the rest of it, because we’ve got all these configurations, the parcel to the Aperloo side there, that doesn’t go with that one and a half story house in the back? That’s a separate lot, right? MR. OBORNE-That’s correct. MR. UNDERWOOD-So we could be looking at another house going in there if you guys wanted to put one out there the same size as, you know, kind of similar to that one. I don’t know, you know, it would be nice if you could go back to the drawing board, before all these things got spilt up, where you could reconfigure lines and stuff like that, but, you know, there’s got to be something that’s done in a logical manner that’s going to accommodate the house that’s already 16 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) pre-existing out there, but at the same time let you do something reasonable with your property also. MR. WAHNON-And I think I’ve demonstrated that. I think I am doing something reasonable. I’m not asking to slip a trailer in there on a slab, and I’m putting in a very nice home. MR. KOSKINAS-Why don’t you just trade? MR. WAHNON-Trade what? MR. KOSKINAS-Trade that lot for that lot, put your house over there on a bigger lot and you won’t need a variance. You have a nice straight driveway. MR. WAHNON-I don’t think he wants to do that. I think he’s very happy with what he owns, and I respect that, and I’m happy with what I own, and I just want to develop it. It’s that simple, and I’m not putting an eyesore in there. I’m putting a very nice home in there. It’s a colonial. That’s what it is. It’s not a trailer. The neighbor’s homes are mobile homes. This home in the back is around a 40 year old raised ranch, and, I might add, in disrepair. It could use a roof. My home’s going to be brand, spanking new. Modular, and energy star, and it’s going to be occupied by probably senior citizens because it’s a small, two bedroom one bath home. Not three bedroom, not four bedroom, not eight bedroom, but two bedroom. So I’m being very conservative, with respect to the neighbors, and for that same reasons. You can drive there and look at that little plot of land you can tell that everybody’s very happy in their environment so, so I come up with a two bedroom one bath home. So there aren’t going to be a lot of children, do you know what I’m saying? It’s going to be a very nice house. I might live there myself, I don’t know. It depends on (lost words). MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. I guess we’re going to close the public hearing, unless there’s anything else you guys want to add, in retrospect? All right. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. UNDERWOOD-We have no correspondence on this from the neighbors on the other side? MR. GARRAND-No correspondence. I didn’t see any. MR. UNDERWOOD-All right. Let’s discuss it and we’ll start with you, Rick. MR. GARRAND-I’m looking at this, and I’ve got to go over the balancing test with this one. That’s the only way to make a sound decision on this one. Can benefits be achieved by other means feasible? If the neighbor, you know, won’t sell any property and increase the size of this parcel, then benefits cannot be achieved by other means feasible. Undesirable change in neighborhood or character to nearby properties. Every other lot I’ve looked at on the map is larger than this lot. This lot is severely undersized compared to every other lot, especially on that road. Whether the request is substantial? Yes, it’s substantial. Given the amount of variance request. Adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood? Quite possibly. You’ve got a small driveway that goes right out into Big Boom Road with no turnaround. I dare say that I would not want to have to back out into Big Boom Road or try to back into that driveway to park there. Especially in the wintertime. It’s going to be a nightmare. It’s going to be plowed in constantly, and the limitations there would prove a hazard, even for me being there. Is this difficulty self-created? Yes and no, given the size, you know, something smaller could go there, yes, but also the constraints of the lot are limiting. MR. WAHNON-I have room to put a turnaround in. That’s not a problem. MR. GARRAND-I just have, I’ve got some serious concerns about this, given the fact that it will probably be the smallest lot in the neighborhood. These other lots are all much larger. I think more of an effort should have been made on someone’s part to increase the size of this at some point. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. John? MR. KOSKINAS-Well, I certainly appreciate the fact that you want to develop your property, but standing out there on the road the other day, that is really a confined space, and I share your concerns for traffic, and also I’m concerned about your neighbors. Of course you could close that driveway any time you wanted. You could just dig a ditch in it and it’s yours, but it seems to me that we’re going to shoehorn in a building and it’s tight. 17 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) MR. WAHNON-How could you be concerned with the neighbor’s driveway when he has 60 feet of road frontage to bring a driveway in? Why would he have to use mine? Why does he need my land to put his driveway in. MR. KOSKINAS-He doesn’t need your land. MR. WAHNON-Okay. Then he should, so what’s he going to do? What’s he going to do then? He’s got to move his driveway. So that shouldn’t be an issue. We just approved, not too long ago, two months ago, we just approved for Tom and Tracy Vanness the same exact thing where they got a back right out onto Ohio Avenue, but that was never an issue, never an issue at all, and they’re setback requirements that they asked for were even more than mine, and they’re occupying more of their lot than me, and so is Jack Balfour, who just went through this process, that I’m putting homes in for. So I don’t see the issues being issues at all. If you want to see a turnaround in there, okay, but you didn’t want to see a turnaround for Tom Vanness. MR. KOSKINAS-I didn’t ask for a turnaround. MR. WAHNON-Well, this gentleman did, okay. Jack Balfour isn’t required. They’re pull in driveways and back out into the road driveways. They’re all up and down all of the states, every state, every driveway on all the states are back outs, but all of a sudden mine’s a hazard? MR. KOSKINAS-Well, look at the road you’re on. MR. WAHNON-There’s roads all through Town, sir, and they’re all pull in out backing out into the roads, and they’re all busy roads, especially now with all the construction going on. MR. KOSKINAS-I appreciate what you’re saying. MR. WAHNON-All right. MR. KOSKINAS-And I hear you clearly. I think that my comments, I can tell you specifically, Big Boom Road to me, it’s speed limit, and it’s traffic, compared to Central, Ohio, Indiana, huge difference, in my mind. MR. WAHNON-Okay, but the fact is that there is no difference. There’s just as much traffic, if not more, on the other states than there is on Big Boom, because there’s more occupied people there. There’s more children on bicycles. There’s school buses. All of that stuff. All you have on Big Boom Road are trucks and a few cars from a few residences. You have very few, it’s not a dense population at all. In fact, right now they’re re-doing the whole road real nice, but the fact still remains that backing out of a driveway hasn’t hindered anybody else coming, that I’ve seen anyway, and been a part of. MR. KOSKINAS-It’s not a criteria to make a decision on by itself. MR. WAHNON-What is wrong with what I’m proposing? MR. KOSKINAS-In my mind, it’s the character of the neighborhood. Look at the lots up here, and it’s unfortunate that you got that lot, but in fairness to you, you should have looked real close at it. If you thought you had an 85 foot lot, big difference. MR. WAHNON-Sir, I have a legal building lot in the Town of Queensbury. The Town of Queensbury told me that, and that I can build on that, and I’m here for a variance to do that. Now, the rest of the neighborhood, this would be the nicest house on there. Period. Bar none, with the highest value, on both sides are very old double wide mobile homes. In the back is a dated one and a half story raised ranch, and all down the road there’s not much better. So, if you’re saying to me that by me putting in a $130,000 modular home, that I’m bringing down the neighborhood, you need to re-think what you’re saying. Because that’s not true. That’s not what’s going on here. This is not a trailer. This is a modular home going on a full cellar, okay, energy star. MR. UNDERWOOD-I’m going to cut you off because we shouldn’t be debating here. I’m going to go to you, Brian. MR. CLEMENTS-Thank you. I have kind of a mixed view here. I have to agree with much of what the applicant has said, and if I looked at this and took these two lots that were right next to each other and split them in half, we would probably give a variance to someone who wanted to build a house on either one of those lots. I think it would be advisable to maybe get together with the neighbors and see what you might be able to do about purchasing that. I know that you said that they didn’t agree with that, but with what you have here, and I’ve also been up and 18 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) down the road, all the way up and down Big Boom Road a couple of times to look at what the rest of the neighborhood looks like, and as far as I can see, although it’s on a small lot, I don’t see where this would be a detriment to the neighborhood. I can’t see that. I think that, I don’t think it would be an undesirable change. I don’t know if it would be desirable, but I think it would be a minor impact. I don’t think the applicant can achieve it by any other method. It is a building lot, as far as the Town of Queensbury is concerned. Will it have adverse impacts on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood? I don’t think it will. You can put a septic system in there. I’m concerned a little bit because there won’t be a garage there, and if somebody came in and asked for a garage there, I don’t think that that would be permitted. So, you know, I would be agreeable to grant this variance. However, you know, I think I’d advise that maybe you might want to talk with neighbors or do something else, but I’d be in agreement if you wanted to do it. MR. WAHNON-I appreciate that. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. MR. KOSKINAS-Is there, to your knowledge, a right of way there? MR. WAHNON-There’s no right of way there. MR. KOSKINAS-But it’s mentioned in your deed. MR. WAHNON-There’s no right of way. The right of way is next to the property. The mention of the right of way in the deed is his right of way, right between, you see, right here, this is the right of way to go back there. MR. KOSKINAS-That’s the right of way. MR. WAHNON-This is his driveway, or he can put his driveway straight back. He can do it either way, because this is his property right here. MR. KOSKINAS-Well, that’s not a right of way if it’s his property. MR. WAHNON-It’s not my right of way, no. This is my line right here. MR. KOSKINAS-They’re not referring to this? MR. WAHNON-Not at all. MR. UNDERWOOD-Okay. Joyce? MRS. HUNT-Yes. Well, I mean, Mr. Wahnon bought a buildable lot, according to Queensbury. MR. WAHNON-Yes. MRS. HUNT-And though it’s a small lot, the home you’re proposing is certainly not out of character with the size of the lot, and the neighbors put an illegal driveway to that property that they did not own, and I think that, I don’t think there will be a detriment to the neighborhood. I think it would be an improvement, and I would be in favor. MR. WAHNON-Thank you. MR. UNDERWOOD-I think we all recognize the substandard size of the lot at .08 acres, you know, and in reflective of that, there’s nothing we can do because it’s a pre-existing lot. I mean, even though the deed had some, you went through the argument in the deed that it was supposed to have been 85 feet and you’re down to 35 feet wide, but if I look at the amount of relief requested, certainly I think the comments about, you know, turning out into the road can be dealt with if you put a turnaround in there, a “T” or something like that, so you don’t have to back out into it, and we have, on smaller lots in Town, allowed people to put their houses up on them as you said before previously. In this instance here, the amount of relief is substantial. I think we would all agree upon that point, but based upon the lot, based upon the size of the house that’s proposed, the house isn’t out of character with what you would put on a small lot that we’ve done similarly on some of the States avenues and other parts of Town, and in this instance here, the relief, you’ve got to look at what the relief is from. Even though the relief goes to the property line, if you go towards the Carlton property on the one side there, you’ve got that flag lot with a flagpole part of the lot there, which is the right of way to speak of, that’s in the deed there. Whether that’s ever going to get developed, anybody that wanted to put a right of 19 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) way in, I don’t think it would meet the requirements because it’s too narrow. It’s only 8.35 feet wide. MR. WAHNON-So it’ll always be there is what you’re saying. MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes, so it’s always going to be there, and it may, the possibility of it being used for a right of way are slim, you know, unless you came in and got a variance, and it would be hard to make the case because the property owner on the far, other side where the current, you know, driveway that’s been there for a long period of time, is much wider. It would be more logical to put it in over on that side there, it would seem to me, and as far as the disposition of that lot to the other side there, even though it’s a separate lot, if you go towards the Anable side there, or excuse me, the Aperloo side on the other side there, I don’t think there’s any impact from the setback either, you know. I would agree with you on that point. It’s not out of character. It’s going to be an improvement. It is excessive relief that’s being requested, and I would agree with you guys, it is excessive relief, but what are you going to do with this lot, say, no, you can’t build anything there? You can put a fence up on it and probably the fence would be hard to make the setbacks, you know, if you ran it up the middle of the property line. So I’m going to agree with the last two people that spoke and agree that I would grant you the variance, but I don’t understand, you know, like when you have neighbors and you have a lot of property, why you can’t get together and work something out that’s going to be to your mutual benefit, you know, and if that’s the way people want to be, then I guess that’s the way things are. I’m going to fall on your side because at least you’ve made an attempt to rectify the situation, whereas I don’t see that happening the other way. It’s just a matter of no, it’s always been this way, and if we want it to stay that way, but that’s not the way it works when you’re crossing somebody else’s property, so that’s a moot point, as far as I’m concerned. So, it looks to me like the neighbors are going to have to work out some new access to their property, and I don’t know if that’s going to trigger anything with us either. Probably not, and they’ll just have to work it out as best. So, what are we going to do, because we’ve only got five, we’ve got to have five to vote yes for this, right? MR. OBORNE-Four. MR. UNDERWOOD-Four. Four to vote yes. So do you guys want to reconsider at all? MR. KOSKINAS-I’ll tell you that I find you compelling, Mr. Chairman. That’s really to the heart of it. I don’t like it, but you’ve got a piece of property. What are you going to do with it? MR. WAHNON-Sir, I don’t like it, either, but I’ve got to do something with it. I’m paying $1200 a year taxes. MR. KOSKINAS-No, I see what Mr. Underwood’s saying, so, in light of your comments, Jim, I’ll agree. MR. UNDERWOOD-And I don’t think we’re being unreasonable to the neighborhood, because there’s not going to really be an effect on that narrow flag lot that exists there to the one side anyway, you know, as it exists. If somebody wanted to come in and propose an access, I don’t even know if the Town would allow it. I mean, I don’t think eight feet wide is even wide enough to drive a car through, would be my guess. MR. OBORNE-You want 20 feet for emergency vehicles. MR. UNDERWOOD-Sure. So, you know, something’s going to have to be done based upon the other properties coming in from the other side or reconfigure the driveways somehow in that respect. MR. KOSKINAS-This is the thing, when people come for these subdivisions of lots, is where you end up. MR. UNDERWOOD-Right, you know, and as we said before, the most difficult ones we’ve had to deal with are the flag lots. This is the second, you know, second instance this year where we’ve had to deal with some partial flag lot or creation of some new property way in the back or something like that. MR. CLEMENTS-I think it would be in the best interest of both to try to work this out, because the access to the house behind could be helped, and the, you know, the size of the lot in the front could be helped. So, you know, I’m going to vote for you, but. MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes, is there any chance that you guys want to try and work something out? 20 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) MR. ANABLE-Well, see, this is really the first I knew something was getting built, and I did not know it was for sale because I probably would have bought it. MR. UNDERWOOD-Would you be interested in trying to work something out if they want to do a lot line adjustment to give you more width or to slide one way or the other or, I mean, I don’t know, at this point, if you’re itching to get it in. MR. WAHNON-I don’t know that it would be affordable. Okay, and I’ve owned it for four years. It’s been for sale for four years. They’ve had the opportunity to own it and not have to worry about this day, and they chose not to. They just, you know, so, I mean, I just want to get on with my business. MR. UNDERWOOD-Sure, and, you know, as a property owner, I mean, I think that you, you know, it’s a matter of it wasn’t any big secret that you own the property. MR. WAHNON-It was for sale, I mean, to every, everybody and anybody that wanted to buy it, including the neighbors, and they’ve enjoyed it free, vacant for many years, that’s true, but now the party’s over. I need to do something with it. MR. KOSKINAS-It’s too bad you can’t trade. You’d have a bigger lot. MR. WAHNON-I’m with you, but, you know, they’re not with me. So I just want to get on with my job, with what I do. I want to put a house there and I want to sell it. MR. UNDERWOOD-All right. Then I guess I’m going to close things up here, and I’ll take this one. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 48-2010 SAM WAHNON, Introduced by James Underwood who moved for its adoption, seconded by Joyce Hunt: Big Boom Road. The applicant is proposing to place a 1216 square foot two story modular home on a .08 acre lot parcel adjacent to Big Boom Road and the applicant is requesting six feet of front setback as well as 15 feet of both north and south side setback relief per Section 179-3- 040. As far as the Board goes, we’ve recognized the very small substandard size of the nature of this lot that’s present here, but when we look at the amount of relief requested, the applicant has agreed that he’s going to put some kind of a turnaround out front there so that you don’t have to back out onto busy Big Boom Road. We also recognize that the setback relief from the side is because of the substandard nature of this 35 foot wide lot, and although we know 35 feet is very narrow for a lot, the home that’s been proposed here is about as small a home as you could put up. It’s only 16 feet wide, this house. At the same time, the lot will accommodate a septic tank, and I guess you’ll be on Town water over there. Whether the benefit could be sought by the applicant. The applicant has looked into some kind of lot line adjustments or agreements with the neighbors, and we have recognized that the neighbors have currently been using the concrete and gravel drive to access their property to the back of that property. That driveway will now be a moot point and they’ll have to reconfigure and recognize some new access at some point in the future with that. Whether the requested variance is substantial? We recognize that it’s severe, the request for the side setback relief, but in retrospect, the side setback relief doesn’t really affect anybody because there’s nothing to either side of that that’s going to be within that range of where the house normally would be if it were a regular standard sized lot. So the request for 15 and a half feet or 62% relief is what we would consider to be severe. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect, we don’t think it will have an adverse effect except upon the access to that property in the back, and it will be an addition to the neighborhood that’s in a positive manner because it will be a new home. It’s a two bedroom home, and it’s probably only going to be, not a family home to speak of, but probably more of a retirement type home, and whether the alleged difficulty was self-created? It’s strictly attributed to the substandard nature of the lot. So I would move for its approval. th Duly adopted this 15 day of September, 2010, by the following vote: MR. OBORNE-Jim, if I could ask you to denote that it’s for both the north and south setback relief. MR. UNDERWOOD-I said for both north and south side. MR. OBORNE-You did? MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes. 21 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/15/10) MR. OBORNE-I apologize. AYES: Mr. Clements, Mr. Koskinas, Mrs. Hunt, Mr. Underwood NOES: Mr. Garrand ABSENT: Mr. Urrico, Mrs. Jenkin MR. UNDERWOOD-You’re all set, I guess. Do you want any of these back? MR. OBORNE-Yes, go ahead and take four of those back at least, because you’ll need to submit them tomorrow. MR. UNDERWOOD-Then you won’t have to print more. All right. I guess that’s it. So we’re off the mic, and we’ll see you guys next week. We will have some tabling motions next week, probably. MR. OBORNE-Yes. Definitely. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, James Underwood, Chairman 22