Staff Notes Town of Queensbury FILE COPY
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
November 19,2003
Agenda Items:
(SV 83-2003) Northway Plaza Associates/Empire Vision
SEQRA Type Unlisted 36 sf sign added to existing oversized pylon sign
(SV 85-2003) Tom Wessling/R&T Collectibles
SEQRA Type Unlisted 24 sf freestanding sign- 2°d freestanding sign in plaza
(AV 86-2003) Lawrence&Kristine Sipowicz
SEQRA Type H Demo 1474 sf home to build 1882 sf home,shoreline,side&height relief
(AV 87-2003) Roaring Brook/Valvoline ( Galena Associates )
SEQRA Type II 125 sf car wash bay addition,sideline setback relief
Criteria for considering an Area Vadance accoOng to Chapter 267 of Town Law:?
Does the benefit to the applicant outweigh the detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the
neighborhood or community by granting the area variance? In malting the determination,
consideration should be given to:
1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a
detriment to nearby properties will be created.
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.
3.Whether the requested area variance is substantial.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.
5. Whether the difficulty is self-created.
Sign Variance No.: 83-2003
Project Applicant: Northway Plaza Associates, Empire Vision
Project Location: Northway Plaza
Meeting Date: October 22, 2003
Description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes construction of 36 sf sign addition to the existing
freestanding sign.
Relief Required:
Applicant requests relief for the construction of the 36 sf Empire Vision sign.
Previously, a sign variance (SV 59-2002) which included relief for a 30 foot tall,
264 sf freestanding sign and 10 feet of setback relief for a 2nd freestanding plaza
sign. Therefore, the relief sought in this case would be to allow a 300 sf
freestanding sign versus the allowable 64 sq. ft allowed pursuant to §140-6,3,(d).
Parcel History (construction/site plan/variance, etc.):
Numerous building permits and sign permits have been issued for this plaza and
the changes in tenancy. Most notable and applicable is SV 59-2002 referenced
above.
Staff comments:
Does the request for a 300 sf sign versus the 64 sf requirement appear to be an
excessive request? Would removal of the 2nd freestanding sign in favor of this
proposed signage be a feasible alternative? Reduction of the oversized Home
Depot sign? Will each tenant in the plaza seek to be named on this sign?
Recently, Home Depot sought to increase the wall signage at their location. In
the end, they chose to reconfigure the exiting signage, included in AV 59-2002,
in order to accommodate the new signage with no net increase. Is a similar
reconfiguration possible with the proposed Empire Vision Sign and the existing
freestanding plaza sign(s)?
L:\Craig\2003ZBAnotes\Nov19\NorthwayPlaza.doc