Minutes AV 9-2022 (Seelye) 3.16.22(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/16/2022)
1
AREA VARIANCE NO. 9-2022 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II KATHARINE SEELYE AGENT(S)
ETHAN HALL (RUCINSKI HALL ARCHITECTURE) OWNER(S) KATHARINE SEELYE
ZONING WR LOCATION 14 CROOKED TREE DRIVE APPLICANT PROPOSES A SECOND
STORY DORMER (136 SQ. FT.) AND INTERIOR ALTERATIONS. THE DORMER ADDITION IS
TO BE OPEN BELOW AND THE EXISTING LOFT TO BE ENCLOSED FOR A BUNK-ROOM. THE
PROJECT INCLUDES FAÇADE CHANGES WITH NEW WINDOWS TO BE INSTALLED ON THE
MAIN FLOOR AND UPPER FLOOR. THE EXISTING HOME WITH A FOOTPRINT OF 1,289 SQ.
FT., DECK/PORCH 700 SQ. FT., AND FLOOR AREA OF 2,788 SQ. FT. HAVE NO CHANGES. NO
SITE WORK IS PROPOSED. SITE PLAN FOR EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING
STRUCTURE IN A CEA. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR SHORELINE SETBACKS. CROSS REF SP
11-2022; AV 70-2017; AV 53-2017; SP 55-2017 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING MARCH 2022
ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY ALD LOT SIZE 0.62 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 239.15-1-10
SECTION 179-3-040; 179-13-010; 179-6-050
ETHAN HALL, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 9-2022, Katharine Seelye, Meeting Date: March 16, 2022 “Project
Location: 14 Crooked Tree Drive Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes a second story
dormer (136 sq. ft.) and interior alterations. The dormer addition is to be open below and the existing loft
to be enclosed for a bunk-room. The project includes façade changes with new windows to be installed on
the main floor and upper floor. The existing home with a footprint of 1,289 sq. ft., deck/porch 700 sq. ft.,
and floor area of 2,788 sq. ft. have no changes. No site work is proposed. Site plan for expansion of a
nonconforming structure in a CEA. Relief requested for shoreline setbacks.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for shoreline setbacks for the construction of a dormer. The project site is in
the WR zone and is located on 0.37 ac.
Section 179-3-040 dimensional
The dormer is to be located 33 ft. to the shoreline where a 75 ft. setback is required.
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 to no
impacts to the neighborhood character 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. Feasible alternatives may be limited due to the
location of the existing home. The existing home is a non-conforming structure.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered minimal
relevant to the code. Relief requested 42 ft. for the shoreline setback.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Staff comments:
The existing home footprint of 1,209 sq. ft. and 700 sq. ft. deck/porch is to remain. The addition is to the
second floor for a dormer that is open to the porch below – no new floor area. The plans show the main
floor plan existing where most of the work on the main floor is the three season porch and office area,
exterior façade and windows. The second floor area shows the existing condition of three bedrooms on the
lake side and then the proposed where the middle bedroom is converted to open loft area and the area
above the three season porch to a dormer with area open to the porch area below – allowing additional
window light for the porch area. The plans show the elevation views existing and proposed.”
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/16/2022)
2
MR. URRICO-And the Planning Board, based on its limited review, did not identify any significant adverse
impacts that cannot be mitigated with the current project proposal, and that motion was adopted March
15th, 2022 by a unanimous vote of seven zero.
MR. UNDERWOOD-Ethan.
MR. HALL-Good evening. For your records my name is Ethan Hall. I’m a principle with Rucinski Hall
Architecture, here tonight representing Kathy Seelye, 14 Crooked Tree Drive. Roy pretty much read it in
as it is. It’s a year round residence that Katharine uses pretty much year round. She lives in Boston and
commutes back and forth in the winter. She’s here all summer, but she does intend to be here year round
once she retires. The idea is the front porch has a, there’s a three season porch that’s going to be converted
into year round and a small office that’s on the east side of the building. From the living room and dining
room area it’s rather muted. You really can’t see out from the lake because of everything that’s in front. So
the idea here is to open up the wall between the living room/dining room area, open that office up and
make whole front visible to the lake. It really faces due north so trying to get as much light into the house
as they can get is really the idea here. So we’ve added a dormer that goes up to the second floor and opens
it into the lower area. Ultimately there’s a decrease in the total number of bedrooms the way it’s set up.
We lose the very small bedroom in the top that becomes the open loft to t he space down below. So it’s
really a change in volume. There’s no change to the footprint since we’re going up with it, but because the
building sits 33 feet from the lake right now, that’s the need for the variance.
MR. UNDERWOOD-So it’s essentially just going to be construction inside. No disturbance on site.
MR. HALL-No site disturbance. We’re not physically altering the outside footprint of the building. We’re
just going up and it’s really just the center section of it. Do you have that front elevation? The front of it
right now has a, you can kind of see the smaller second floor windows and then kind of a shed roof. The
windows that you see there are the office and then the screened porch or the three season porch runs from
the west side of the building. The idea is the new dormer comes up off of the front wall and then goes back
to the main ridge of the house and kind of opens that whole space up to the inside. All of the glass that
we’re looking at putting in there is all the non-reflective, non-glare glass. It’s all super insulated glass.
MR. UNDERWOOD-For the benefit of the Board, we had previously granted approvals for Area Variances
in 2017 on this parcel and then everything was upgraded at that point in time. Any que stions from Board
members? I guess I’ll open the public hearing. Any members of the public wishing to speak? Any
correspondence, Roy?
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
MR. URRICO-Yes, there’s one letter. “As the next door neighbors we have no problem with the request
for a variance.” And that’s Barry and Mark Handleman, 3142 Route 9L.
MR. UNDERWOOD-All right, anything else you want to add?
MR. HALL-It seems pretty straightforward.
MR. UNDERWOOD-All right. I guess I’ll start with you, Brady.
MR. STARK-I am in favor of the project. This seems pretty straightforward.
MR. UNDERWOOD-Roy?
MR. URRICO-Yes, I’m okay with this project as proposed.
MR. UNDERWOOD-Cathy?
MRS. HAMLIN-The same.
MR. HENKEL-It makes sense.
MR. UNDERWOOD-Brent?
MR. MC DEVITT-I’m in favor of the project. They’re losing a bedroom. There’s no change, as Ethan said,
really in terms of the volume, no site disturbance. It’s a pretty easy one. So I’m in favor.
MR. UNDERWOOD-And I too would be in favor of the project. It’s a simple project. Does somebody
want to make a motion on this?
MRS. DWYRE-Would you like to close that public hearing?
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/16/2022)
3
MR. UNDERWOOD-I’ll close the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Katharine
Seelye. Applicant proposes a second story dormer (136 sq. ft.) and interior alterations. The dormer
addition is to be open below and the existing loft to be enclosed for a bunk -room. The project includes
façade changes with new windows to be installed on the main floor and upper floor. The existing home
with a footprint of 1,289 sq. ft., deck/porch 700 sq. ft., and floor area of 2,788 sq. ft. have no changes. No site
work is proposed. Site plan for expansion of a nonconforming structure in a CEA. Relief requested for
shoreline setbacks.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for shoreline setbacks for the construction of a dormer. The project site is in
the WR zone and is located on 0.37 ac.
Section 179-3-040 dimensional
The dormer is to be located 33 ft. to the shoreline where a 75 ft. setback is required.
SEQR Type II – no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, March 16, 2022.
Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon
consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter
267 of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows:
1. There is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby
properties because this project is just improving a property.
2. Feasible alternatives can be considered limited because of the home’s location and its already
nonconforming structure.
3. The requested variance is minimal relative to the Code.
4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood
or district.
5. The alleged difficulty may be considered self-created.
6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance
would outweigh (approval) the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the
neighborhood or community;
7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
8. The Board also proposes the following conditions:
a) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution.
BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO.
9-2022 KATHARINE SEELYE, Introduced by Brady Stark, who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Brent McDevitt:
Duly adopted this 16th Day of March 2022 by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Henkel, Mr. Urrico, Mr. Stark, Mrs. Hamlin, Mr. McDevitt, Mr. Underwood
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. McCabe