Loading...
Minutes (Barton) 7.18.24(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/18/2024) 1 AREA VARIANCE NO. 38-2024 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II RONALD & JILL BARTON AGENT(S) HUTCHINS ENGINEERING PLLC; CURT DYBAS, R.A. OWNER(S) RONALD & JILL BARTON ZONING WR LOCATION 74 BAY PARKWAY APPLICANT PROPOSES A RENOVATION OF AN EXISTING 1,155 SQ. FT. HOME WITH 625 SQ. FT. PORCH/DECK AREA. THE PROJECT INCLUDES REMOVAL OF AN UPPER LEVEL OPEN DECK AND AN ENCLOSED PORCH TO CONSTRUCT A NEW 185 SQ. FT. FOOTPRINT BASEMENT AND FIRST FLOOR ADDITION AND A NEW UPPER DECK/TERRACE AREA. THE EXISTING FLOOR AREA IS 4,150 SQ. FT. WITH A NEW TOTAL FLOOR AREA OF 4,240 SQ. FT. PROPOSED. SITE WORK INCLUDES STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND SHORELINE PLANTINGS. SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA AND HARD-SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF SHORELINE. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR SETBACKS AND NEW FLOOR AREA. CROSS REF SP 38-2024; SP 1-2004; AV 16-1992; SP 11-92; AV 37-1989; AV 36-1989; SP 19-89 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING JULY 2024 ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY ALD LOT SIZE 0.26 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 226.15-1- 23 SECTION 179-3-040 CURT DYBAS & LUCAS DOBIE, REPRESENTING APPLICANTS, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 38-2024, Ronald & Jill Barton, Meeting Date: July 17, 2024 “Project Location: 74 Bay Parkway Description of Proposed Project: Applicants propose a renovation of an existing 1,155 sq ft home with 625 sq ft porch/deck area. The project includes removal of an upper level open deck and an enclosed porch to construct a new 185 sq ft footprint basement and first floor addition and a new upper deck/terrace area. The existing floor area is 4,150 sq ft with a new total floor area of 4,240 sq ft proposed. Site work includes stormwater management and shoreline plantings. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA and hard-surfacing within 50 ft of shoreline. Relief requested for setbacks and new floor area. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks and new floor area in a CEA for alterations and additions to an existing home. The project site is on a 0.25 ac parcel in the Waterfront Residential zone. 179-3-040 WR The addition is to be 34 ft from the shoreline where a 50 ft setback is required. A portion of the existing porch is to be renovated and is to be 32.4 ft from the shoreline where a 50 ft setback is required. Floor area relief is in excessive of the maximum allowed of 2,513 sf where 4,240 sf is proposed. The home’s existing floor area is 4,150 sf noting the building was constructed in 1973 and renovated in 1986 where floor area in unfinished basement areas were not accounted for. 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 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 considered limited due to the location of the existing home and alterations proposed. (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/18/2024) 2 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code. The relief requested for the addition is 16 ft and the porch area is 17.6 ft. The floor area relief is 1,727 sf. 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 will have minimal impact on the physical or environmental conditions. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes the alteration to the existing home to remove a portion of the home and construct the new addition. The plans show the expansion of the bedrooms on the lower level, improving the dining and breakfast area on the first floor, and an open terrace on the second floor. The plans show the exterior views of the existing and proposed conditions.” MR. URRICO-And then 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 was adopted on July 17th, 2024 by a unanimous vote. MR. DOBIE-Good evening, Board. Thank you. Again, for your record Lucas Dobie with Hutchins Engineering, representing our clients Ron and Jill Barton at 74 Bay Parkway, which is the northeast portion of Assembly Point about four properties south of the Point, and the project architect and mastermind Curt Dybas is with us. He did a lot of the legwork and all the site planning to improve the property. Again, I appreciate Staff, the nice write up on it. Our clients purchased the property in 2002 and th e home was built in ’73 and renovated in ’86 and it needs a renovation again. They’re proposing to re-work the inside and the main area of focus is what I call,, and I’ll stand up because it’s easier to show it on the Board. I don’t have a laser pointer, but to demo what I call the sunroom which is at the first floor level, which is their dining room, and also the second floor balcony deck, demo those and to construct a new basement level and first floor level addition, and then it’ll have a terrace at the second floor level. So the two structures go away and then to construct an addition in here which is situated a little further back from the shore. The sunroom now is 31 feet. The addition is 34 feet, and with re -working the site, it amounts to a 45 square foot reduction in impervious coverage and a 90 square foot increase in the floor area. So we believe it’s a very minimal request for the Board, and that’s our two variances that we’re asking for. Again, the shoreline setback at 34 feet where 50 is required, and then the 90 square feet increase in the floor area ratio. To provide the mitigation, we provided stormwater management where there is none now in a series of four raingardens and some infiltration trench along the garage and then an area of shoreline buffering along the southerly portion of the boathouse. So we feel our clients have gone the extra mile to improve the property and we feel the request is very reasonable. So we’d be happy to answer any questions the Board may have. Excuse me. Let me add that last June the septic system passed the Lake George Park Commission and I wrote a letter basically reverse engineering the sizing for modern criteria that meets that. So it’s, the septic, we certified it. The Park Commission passed it. So we’re very comfortable with that as well. So we’d be happy to answer any questions, and we’re here to ask for your approval tonight so we can go back to the Planning Board next week, and they’d like to do the project starting around Labor Day is my understanding. So, thank you. MR. MC CABE-So do we have questions of the applicant? You must have done a pretty good job here, no questions. So a public hearing has been advertised. So at this particular time I’m going to open the public (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/18/2024) 3 hearing, see if there’s anybody in the audience that would like to address us on this particular project? Roy, do we have anything written? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. URRICO-No written comment. MR. MC CABE-So 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 Mary. MRS. PALACINO-I have no difficulty with the project at all. I think what you’re doing in reducing the square footage is fine. MR. MC CABE-Jim? MR. UNDERWOOD-It’s a minor change from what exists. I think it’s slightly improving the permeability on the site and also the capture of groundwater. So I’m all for it. MR. MC CABE-John? MR. HENKEL-I guess the good outweighs the bad. So I’d be on board. MR. MC CABE-Ron? MR. KUHL-I have no problem with it. I’m glad you brought Curt along. MR. MC CABE-Roy? MR. URRICO-I’m in favor of the application. It satisfies the criteria. MR. MC CABE-Bob? MR. KEENAN-Yes, I think the small changes here are an improvement. So I’m for it. MR. MC CABE-And I, too, support the project. I think that what we’re giving up is very minimal and we’re gaining stormwater management which is always a good deal. So with that in mind, Jim, I wonder if you could compose a motion for us. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Ronald & Jill Barton. Applicants propose a renovation of an existing 1,155 sq ft home with 625 sq ft porch/deck area. The project includes removal of an upper level open deck and an enclosed porch to construct a new 185 sq ft footprint basement and first floor addition and a new upper deck/terrace area. The existing floor area is 4,150 sq ft with a new total floor area of 4,240 sq ft proposed. Site work includes stormwater management and shoreline plantings. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA and hard-surfacing within 50 ft of shoreline. Relief requested for setbacks and new floor area. Relief Required: (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/18/2024) 4 The applicant requests relief for setbacks and new floor area in a CEA for alterations and additions to an existing home. The project site is on a 0.25 ac parcel in the Waterfront Residential zone. 179-3-040 WR The addition is to be 34 ft from the shoreline where a 50 ft setback is required. A portion of the existing porch is to be renovated and is to be 32.4 ft from the shoreline where a 50 ft setback is required. Floor area relief is in excessive of the maximum allowed of 2,513 sf where 4,240 sf is proposed. The home’s existing floor area is 4,150 sf noting the building was constructed in 1973 and renovated in 1986 where floor area in unfinished basement areas were not accounted for. SEQR Type II – no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Thursday, July 18, 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 because it will slightly improve the situational runoff on the property. 2. Feasible alternatives have been considered by the Board and are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request. 3. The requested variance is not substantial because it’s a flat line compared to what they started with. 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. 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh 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. 38-2024 RONALD & JILL BARTON, Introduced by James Underwood, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Keenan. Duly adopted this 18th Day of July 2024 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Kuhl, Mr. Underwood, Mr. Keenan, Mr. Urrico, Mr. Henkel, Mrs. Palacino, Mr. McCabe (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/18/2024) 5 NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Cipperly MR. MC CABE-Congratulations, you have a project. MR. DYBAS-This was Larry Corbett’s house and it was built by Bob Ruggles. MR. MC CABE-Two famous names here. MR. DOBIE-Thank you so much, Board.