Resolution 10.18.23
Zoning Board of Appeals – Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve
Applicant Name: Gary Higley
File Number: AV 41-2023
Location: 23 Jay Road
Tax Map Number: 289.10-1-14
ZBA Meeting Date: October 18, 2023
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Gary Higley.
Applicant proposes to construct a 137 sq. ft. screened porch addition to an existing home. The existing home is
2,448 sq. ft. footprint and the existing deck is 1,218 sq. ft. A portion of the deck is to be replaced with the
screen porch. The existing floor area is 4,306 sq. ft. where the new floor area is to be 4,443 sq. ft. The existing
site conditions are to remain as is. Site plan for new floor area. Relief requested for setbacks.
The applicant requests relief for setbacks for the construction of an enclosed porch. The project is located on a
0.23 ac parcel in the Waterfront Residential Zone.
179-3-040 dimensional, 179-4-080 porches…
The enclosed porch is to be 38.6 ft. from the shoreline of Glen Lake where a 50 ft. setback is required.
SEQR Type II – no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on October 18, 2023.
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 we’re simply screening in an existing porch.
2. Feasible alternatives have been considered by the Board and we find this reasonable and a minimal request.
3. The requested variance is not substantial because it’s screening in an existing porch.
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, but it’s simply in line with what the applicant wants
to do.
Relief Required:
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. 41-
2023, Introduced by Robert Keenan, who moved for its adoption, seconded by James Underwood:
Duly adopted this 18th Day of October 2023 by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Urrico, Mr. Henkel, Mrs. Palacino, Mr. Kuhl, Mr. Underwood, Mr. Keenan, Mr. McCabe
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Cipperly