Resolution (Parillo) 7.20.22/i Zoning Board of Appeals — Record of Resolution
�* Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
_161M of (`recnsburT
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve
Applicant Name: Frank Parillo
File Number: AV 33-2022
Location: 199 Corinth Road
Tax Map Number: 309.13-2-2
ZBA Meeting Date: July 20, 2022
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Frank Parillo.
Applicant proposes a two -lot commercial subdivision of a 4.39 acre parcel. The new parcels are to be 1.29 ac
with the existing Taco Bell and the 3.1 ac is to be vacant and become a corner lot. The 1.29 acre parcel is a
developed parcel for Taco Bell with one exit point to Corinth Road. Waivers are requested for landscaping,
clearing, grading and erosion control, and stormwater as no new development is proposed at this time.
Subdivision for creation of two lots. Relief requested for access frontage.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for access frontage for one of the two lots of the subdivision. The property is
located in the CI-18 zone and is 4.39 ac.
Chapter 183 subdivision, 179-4-050 frontage
The applicant proposes a two -lot commercial subdivision where the 1.29 acre parcel with Taco Bell building
access is located on the proposed 3.2 acre parcel. Relief is requested for direct access - to and from.
SEQR Type II — no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, July 20, 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
as this property will be able to be sold and they'll have their one curb cut on Corinth Road.
2. There really aren't that many feasible alternatives. They've been considered by the Board, are reasonable
and have been included to minimize the request.
3. The requested variance is not substantial because it's going to enable the property to be sold and be utilized.
4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.
5. The alleged difficulty we could say is self-created but it was only because of wanting to have just one curb
cut.
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. 33-
2022, Introduced by Ronald Kuhl, who moved for its adoption, seconded by John Henkel:
Duly adopted this 20th Day of July 2022 by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Cipperly, Mr. Kuhl, Mr. Henkel, Mr. Urrico, Mr. Underwood, Mr. McCabe
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. McDevitt