Loading...
Minutes 2.21.24(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 02/21/2024) 1 AREA VARIANCE NO. 7=2024 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II MICHAEL SHEARER AGENT(S) RU HOLMES ENGINEERS, PLLC OWNER(S) MICHAEL SHEARER ZONING WR LOCATION 52 RUSSELL HARRIS RD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO DEMOLISH AN EXISTING HOME TO CONSTRUCT A NEW HOME WITH A 1,358 SQ. FT. FOOTPRINT AND FLOOR AREA OF 1,752 SQ. FT. THE EXISTING 548 SQ. FT. GARAGE AND 164 SQ. FT. SHED ARE TO REMAIN, ALONG WITH EXISTING GARDEN BEDS AND TREES. THE PROJECT INCLUDES UTILIZING THE EXISTING SEPTIC SYSTEM AND MINIMAL DISTURBANCE AS NEW HOME TO BE LOCATED IN SIMILAR LOCATION. SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA AND HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF THE SHORELINE. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR SETBACKS & STORMWATER DEVICE SETBACKS. CROSS REF SP 8-2024, AV 30-2019; SP 42-2019; AV 33- 2011; SP 36-2011 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING FEBRUARY 2024 ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY ALD LOT SIZE 0.26 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 240.5-1-6 SECTION 179-3-040; 179-6- 050; 179-6-065; 147 BOB HOLMES, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 7-2024, Michael Shearer, Meeting Date: February 21, 2024 “Project Location: 52 Russell Harris Rd. Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to demolish an existing home to construct new home with a 1,358 sq. ft. footprint and floor area of 1,752 sq. ft. The existing 548 sq. ft. garage and 164 sq. ft. shed are to remain, along with existing garden beds and trees. The project includes utilizing the existing septic system and minimal disturbance as new home to be located in similar location. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA and hard surfacing within 50 ft. of the shoreline. Relief requested for setbacks, permeability & stormwater device setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks, permeability & stormwater device setbacks. The project is located on a 0.26 ac parcel in the Waterfront Residential zone. Section 179-3-040 The new home is to be 33 ft. 9 inches from the shoreline where a 50 ft. shoreline setback is required. The home on the south side proposed is 8 ft. 3 inches to the house and 7 ft. 5 inches to the steps where 12 ft. is required. The permeability is proposed to be 65.43% where 75% is required. The proposed elevated terrace is to be less than 35 ft. from the lake where 35 ft. is required for a stormwater device. 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. The project may be considered to have minimal to no impact on the neighboring properties. 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 feasible alternatives may be possible to reduce the building size and reduce the hard surfacing on the site. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief may be considered moderate relevant to the code. The setback relief is 16 ft. 3 inches for the shoreline, then 3 ft. 9 inches to the south property line, and permeability 9.57% in excess of hard surfacing on the site. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project as proposed may be considered to have minimal impact on the environmental conditions of the site or area. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The project as proposed may be considered self- created. Staff comments: The new home is to be 1008 sf footprint with a second floor of 744 sf and a small mechanical room in the crawl space area. The project work includes a shoreline planting plan and landscape stone path from the garage area to the shore area. The plans show the location of the existing and new home. The plans include floor plans and elevations.” (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 02/21/2024) 2 MR. URRICO-And the Planning Board, based on its limited review, did not identify any significant adverse effects or impacts that cannot be mitigated with the current project proposal, and that was adopted on February 20th, 2024 by a unanimous vote. MR. HOLMES-Good evening. My name is Bob Holmes and I’m with RU Holmes Engineers and I’m joined by Mike and Gabby Shearer, the applicants. I believe you’ve summed up pretty well what our application’s looking for. One item, or a couple of items I’d point out. That of the variances in which we are seeking as far as setbacks go and lot coverage, is they’re already pre-existing, non-conforming, and we are making some incremental improvements to those setbacks, given the configuration of the new home. The new home will largely match the footprint of the existing home, and the last variance was one that we ended up having to work out with Staff on their recommendation was with regards to the stormwater setback. It was our initial impression that that was not going to be necessary because we were not looking to impound any kind of stormwater there. It was merely an effort to mask an overflow pipe if there were extreme storms that this might surcharge the existing stormwater, but in an effort to keep th ings moving forward that variance request was added. MR. MC CABE-So we have questions of the applicant? So I have a concern about the permeability. So you’re saying that the permeability is basically the same now as it will be in the future? MR. HOLMES-Correct. We recognize the permeability requirement under the Code is 75%. The lot as it presently exists is 64.53%, and we are making an improvement. It’s proposed to be at 65.4%. It’s is a .9 percent improvement, but it’s an improvement. We searched long and hard on where we could make appropriate removal, trying to improve it further. It’s just that when you start narrowing up sidewalks and things of that nature it became a bit tough. MR. MC CABE-So if they improve the permeability, then that reduces the requirement for that variance. MR. HENKEL-Which they did. MR. MC CABE-So we can remove that. MRS. MOORE-You can remove that. MR. MC CABE-So other questions of the applicant? MRS. MOORE-Let me just make sure you understand again. So I guess I didn’t look at it, in the sense, when I first looked at it I thought there was a decrease in permeability, but if you look at what he said, the current situation is at 64% green. They’re making it 65% green. So that’s a one percent improvement overall. MR. MC CABE-Right. Other questions? So a public hearing has been advertised. So at this particular time I’m going to open the public hearing, see if there’s anybody in the audience who would like to address us on this particular project. Roy, do we have anything written? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. URRICO-There’s no written comments. MR. MC CABE-So at this particular time I’m going to close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. MC CABE-I’m going to poll the Board and I’m going to start with John. MR. HENKEL-I think they’re asking for minimal. I have no problem with the project as is. MR. MC CABE-Mary? MRS. PALACINO-I have no difficulty with it as well. MR. MC CABE-Roy? MR. URRICO-I’m in favor of the project as presented. MR. MC CABE-Bob? MR. KEENAN-It’s a really tough lot here but it looks like you’re actually improving what’s there to some extent. So I’d be in favor of it. (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 02/21/2024) 3 MR. MC CABE-Dick? MR. CIPPERLY-I also agree. I think the improvements are going to make it better. MR. MC CABE-Jim? MR. UNDERWOOD-It’s an improvement. MR. MC CABE-And I, too, look at this as an improvement. And the other, the setbacks that are being requested are actually pretty minimal and so I, too, support this project. So, Dick, I’ve got to go to the well one more time. MR. CIPPERLY-No problem. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Michael Shearer. Applicant proposes to demolish an existing home to construct new home with a 1,358 sq. ft. footprint and floor area of 1,752 sq. ft. The existing 548 sq. ft. garage and 164 sq. ft. shed are to remain, along with existing garden beds and trees. The project includes utilizing the existing septic system and minimal disturbance as new home to be located in similar location. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA and hard surfacing within 50 ft. of the shoreline. Relief requested for setbacks, permeability, and stormwater device setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks, permeability & stormwater device setbacks. The project is located on a 0.26 ac parcel in the Waterfront Residential zone. Section 179-3-040 The new home is to be 33 ft. 9 inches from the shoreline where a 50 ft. shoreline setback is required. The home on the south side proposed is 8 ft. 3 inches to the house and 7 ft. 5 inches to the steps where 12 ft. is required. The permeability is proposed to be 65.43% where 75% is required. The proposed elevated terrace is to be less than 35 ft. from the lake where 35 ft. is required for a stormwater device. SEQR Type II – no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on February 21, 2024. 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. This is basically a one for one replacement with a little improvement. 2. Feasible alternatives have been considered. This is good as it’s going to get. They are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request. 3. The requested variance is not substantial because it’s basically a one for one replacement. 4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. 5. The alleged difficulty is self-created. You want to replace your house. 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. 7-2024 MICHAEL SHEARER, Introduced by Richard Cipperly, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Michael McCabe: Duly adopted this 21st Day of February 2024 by the following vote: (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 02/21/2024) 4 AYES: Mr. Underwood, Mr. Urrico, Mr. Cipperly, Mr. Henkel, Mrs. Palacino, Mr. Keenan, Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Kuhl MR. MC CABE-Congratulations, you have a project. MR. HOLMES-Thank you.