Loading...
10-16-2024 REVISED (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) QUEENSBURYZONINGBOARD OFAPPEATS FIRSTREGUTAR MEETING OCTOBER Iff,2024 INDEX Area Variance No. 36-2024 Stephen Haraden 1. REQUEST TO TABLE Tax Map No. 226.12-1-74 Area Variance No. 15-2024 Patten Property Development 2. Tax Map No. 2S9.11-1-23 &2S9.11-1-5 Area Variance No. 46-2024 Mountain Vista Properties(Chris Racicot) 6. Tax Map No. 315.6-2-12 Area Variance No.52-2024 Lowe's Home Centers LLC 13. Tax Map No. 296.20-1-50.1 Area Variance No.59-2024 Tamara Sutphin/3S4 Ridge LLC 19. Tax Map No. 297.17-1-47 Area Variance No. 60-2024 Jennifer&David Luce 21. Tax Map No. 227.13-2-37 THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTH'S MINUTES(IF ANY)AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. 1 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 16TK,2024 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT MICHAEL MC CABE,CHAIRMAN JAMES UNDERWOOD,VICE CHAIRMAN ROY URRICO,SECRETARY JOHN HENKEL RONALD KUHL ROBERT KEENAN MARY PALACINO,ALTERNATE MEMBERS ABSENT RICHARD CIPPERLY LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER-KAREN DWYRE MR. MC CABE-Good evening. I'd like to open tonight's meeting of the Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals,Wednesday, October 16h, 2024. If you haven't been here before,our procedure is quite simple. There should bean agenda on the back table. We'll call each case up,read the case into our record,allow the applicant to present his case. We'll ask questions of the applicant. If a public hearing has been advertised, we'll open the public hearing, take input from the public, close the public hearing, poll the Board and then proceed accordingly. We have a couple of administrative items first. John,I wonder if we could have a motion. APPROVAL OF MINUTES September IS,2024 MOTION TO APPROVE THE QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 18TH, 2024, Introduced by John Henkel who moved for its adoption, seconded by Ronald Kuhl: Duly adopted this 16`h day of September,2024,by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Henkel,Mr.Kuhl,Mr. Underwood,Mr. Keenan,Mr. Urrico,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Cipperly ABSTAINED: Mrs.Palacino ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS: REQUEST TO TABLE AV 36-2024 (STEPHEN HARADEN)TO NOVEMBER 20,2024 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Stephen Haraden. Applicant requests as-built conditions for a 2021 project for a new 3 bedroom home with associated site work. The as-built conditions include a home of 2,751 sq It footprint with a 232 sq It porch/deck area,hard surfacing within 50 ft of the shoreline, and other hard surfacing In addition, there has been relocation of the rain gardens and house. Site plan for hard surfacing within 50 ft of shoreline and request for as-built conditions. Relief requested for floor area,permeability,and setbacks. MOTION TO TABLE AREA VARIANCE NO. 36-2024 STEPHEN HARADEN, Introduced by John Henkel who moved for its adoption,seconded by Robert Keenan: Tabled to the November 20,2024 Zoning Board meeting with information due by October 30`h,2024. Duly adopted this 16`h day of October,2024,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Underwood,Mr. Kuhl,Mrs. Palacino,Mr.Henkel,Mr. Urrico,Mr.Keenan,Mr. McCabe 2 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Cipperly MR. KUHL-I assume that this was tabled until October,right? November now,but it was October? MR. MC CABE-Yes. MR. KUHL-Okay. Thank you. AREA VARIANCE 14-2024 (PATTEN PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT) WITHDRAWN BY APPLICANT MR. MC CABE-So our first application is AV 15-2024,Patten Property Management,96 Hall Road. TABLED ITEMS: AREA VARIANCE NO. 15-2024 SEQRA TYPE TYPE 11 PATTEN PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT AGENT(S) ETHAN HALL (RUCINSKI HALL ARCHITECTURE) OWNER(S) PATTEN PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LLC ZONING WR LOCATION 96 HALL ROAD (REVISED) APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A NEW 2,267 SQ. FT. (FOOTPRINT) HOME WITH 255 SQ. FT. PORCH/DECK AREA WITH A FLOOR AREA OF 5,147 SQ. FT. THE EXISTING HOME HAS BEEN DEMOLISHED AND THERE ARE OTHER ITEMS TO BE DEMOLISHED AS WELL. THE PROJECT INCLUDES COMBINING AN ADJOINING LOT OWNED BY THE APPLICANT INTO THE EXISTING LOT WHICH WILL INCREASE THE OVERALL LOT SIZE FROM 0.20 ACRES TO A TOTAL OF 0.76 ACRES. THIS COMBINATION OF LOTS WILL PROVIDE FRONTAGE FOR THE PROPERTY AND ALLOW ACCESS DIRECTLY FROM HALL ROAD. SITE WORK INCLUDES NEW SEPTIC,WELL,LANDSCAPING,STORMWATER,AND OTHER ASSOCIATED LOT DISTURBANCE. THE PROJECT INCLUDES ANEW DOCK SYSTEM ALONG GLEN LAKE. SITE PLAN FOR HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF THE SHORELINE AND NEW FLOOR AREA. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR SETBACKS,HEIGHT AND NUMBER OF GARAGES. CROSS REF SP 11-2024 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING N/A LOT SIZE 0.76 ACRES TAX MAP NO.289.11-1-23&z 289.11-1-5. SECTION 179-3-040 ETHAN HALL,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT;CHRIS PATTEN,PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 15-2024, Patten Property Development, Meeting Date: October 16, 2024 "Project Location: 96 Hall Road Description of Proposed Project: (Revised)Applicant proposes to construct a new 2,267 sq ft(footprint)home with 255 sq ft porch/deck area with a floor area of 5,147 sq ft.The existing home has been demolished and there are other items to be demolished as well. The project includes combining an adjoining lot owned by the applicant into the existing lot which will increase the overall lot size from 0.29 acres to a total of 0.76 acres.This combination of lots will provide frontage for the property and allow access directly from Hall Road. Site work includes new septic, well, landscaping, stormwater, and other associated lot disturbance. The project includes a new dock system along Glen Lake. Site plan for hard surfacing within 50 ft of the shoreline and new floor area. Relief requested for setbacks,height,number of garages,and fence type in front yard. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks,height,and number of garages. The project site is to be on a 0.76 ac parcel in the Waterfront Residential(combined two parcels). Section 179-3-40 The new home is to be located 37 ft I inches from the shoreline where a 50 ft setback is required,the height is to be 32 ft 6 inches where the maximum allowed is 2S ft. Relief for the number of garages where one is allowed at 1,100 sf and three are proposed due to the house design less than 1,100 in total.A U-Shaped dock is proposed to be 6 ft 3 inches from the property line project where a 20 ft setback is required. Relief is no longer rcquircd for floor area,road frontagc,and dock as the applicant has combincd two parccls as part of the project fora new home. The fence type and height has been revised to be 4 jt and picket non-privacy. 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 little to no impact on the neighboring properties. 3 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) 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 considered to reduce the size of the home. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief may be considered substantial relevant to the code. Relief is requested for 12 ft 11 inches from the home to the shoreline,4 ft 6 inches taller than allowed,and 2 more garages than allowed. 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 applicant proposes to construct a new home with associated site work The applicant revised the application to combine both parcels and to construct only one home. The plans show the location of the home and driveway access to the home. The plans also show the location of the docking system to be 20 ft from each property line. The revision includes additional permeability as the driveway is proposed as permeable pavement." MR. HALL-Good evening. For your records,my name is Ethan Hall. I'm a principle with Rucinski Hall Architecture. With me tonight is Chris Patten,the owner of the property. We've been before you back in July,August, something like that. Originally we were doing a boundary line adjustment,trying to put a second house on the second lot. It starts out with two lots. We were going to do a boundary line adjustment to get Chris some frontage and had a second lot that was going to have a second home on it. Obviously that didn't fly with this Board and so we've gone back,done some re-design,combined the lots into one, dropped the second house, and we're just back to the one house,which would be the lakefront house. There are the variances, as Mr. Urrico pointed to. The height variance is because we are moving the house back from the lake, and as we move back we move up and we're held to the standard of the lowest point on the existing grade to highest point of proposed structure. We've moved the house back to gain,so that we're back more in line with the houses that are on either side of it than the previous house was, and we have moved it up as we moved back,just because of grade to get us up out of the flood zone. For those reasons,that gets our height. The dock has been realigned so that we no longer are seeking any dock variances, and the other setback is the front yard setback or front setback to the shoreline,which is larger than what the original home was,but it's still not up to the 50 feet. MR. MC CABE-So do we have questions of the applicant? MR. HENKEL-I don't understand those garages. I mean you've got the two garage doors that are facing the lake, and obviously there's something in front of that. How are you going to get anything in and out of there if there's? MR. HALL Just aesthetics,so that they can open the kitchen up to have it be open. MR. HENKEL-On the one side,but then the other side is going to be for a plane or whatever? MR. HALL-It's for the airplane. MR. HENKEL-Okay,but how are you going to access that with the,there's,you know. MR. HALL-The airplane wings actually fold up and can actually go through a door about the size of the one behind you. So we just kind of left the two doors the same size. MR. HENKEL-Okay,because it looks like there's something of support there. MR. HALL-There is. It's significantly out in front of the door,so we can get the plane around it and get it in there. And the three garages, I went through it with Laura. If it were three garages together,we'd be okay,but because it's three individual garages,that's the twist there. MR. PATTEN-There's two garages on the front there. MR. HENKEL-There's two on the front,right. MR. PATTEN-I didn't want to,actually we had a three bay garage initially but then I pull up to my house and you look down it's all garage. So I actually asked Ethan,I said can we just split this into two garages 4 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) and have a nice entryway. So that's the only reason why we have one additional garage,and then to answer your question,the airplane that I have,it would be great to store there,but it's really just kind of universal stored here. I have a trailer for it that I haul it S0010 of the time. It's not specifically used for the airplane. I have it in the hanger most of the time. MR. HENKEL-The other one is to expose the kitchen? MR. HALL-Yes,it's for the kitchen and dining area. It's just so that they can get a full,open space. MR. HENKEL-Do you know, approximately, the square footage of what the roofline is over the allowed 2S feet? MR. HALL-It's a very small. MR. KUHL-I thought it was 32,32 and change. MR. HALL-Thirty-two is the height,and it's just the one peak right there. That little piece there is where my 32 feet is because it's taken thereto the high point. So the dotted line is the line of existing grade,and like I said,as we pushed this back,we did it up so that we could get it out of the flood elevation. It pushes us up above where we'd be. So it's just that one little chunk right there that's going to put us over the 32 feet. MR.HENKEL-Because from the roadside it's not going to look that big,but from the lake it's going to look huge,but there's a lot of homes that are like that. MR.HALL-Right,yes,because it's setback. I mean ultimately when we get done it's really not,but because we're having to go from existing grade to highest point,I mean that's the line of proposed grade there,and this actual dark line is 2S feet above final grade,but it's because of the way the zoning's written,it's lowest point of existing to highest point of proposed,and that catches us quite often. MR. HENKEL-Thankyou. MR. MC CABE-Other questions? MR. KUHL-Yes, I have a couple. I might only have one. I don't know. What about that right of way behind you? You're not encroaching on that,are you? MR. HALL-No. MR. PATTEN-No,I'm in good standing with all the neighbors,too. MR. KUHL-With the way you clear cut everything,have you got any plans to re-plant? MR. HALL-Yes, there's a landscape plan that was submitted. So this is the area here, and we've got plantings that start at the front of the house and run all the way up the side line here,up in the driveway, up Hall Road,here,and then around the right of way,and then we do have two plantings that are going to be here. This is all grassed area now, for this layout, and we've got some additional plantings that run down here,and this driveway comes in to keep the lights from shining through on that driveway,and then we put some additional plantings back around the bottom down there. So the total, I don't have the number right in front of me,but it's,we added like 65 plantings between shrubs and trees. MR. KUHL-In all seriousness,you cut down a lot of timber. The plantings are going to be trees also? MR. HALL-Yes. MR. KUHL-Okay. Thank you. MR. PATTEN-The idea is to kind of make that lot,it's kind of like a grass lot, make it very private. As you're coming down Hall Road I don't want people to be able to see the house when you're turning the corner. MR. MC CABE-So a public hearing has been advertised. So at this particular time I'm going to open the public hearing and see if there's anybody out there that would like to address us on this particular project? Do we have anything written,Roy? PUBLIC HEARING OPEN MR. URRICO-No. 5 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) 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 John. MR.HENKEL-I think it's a good project. The septic system's way away from the lake. He's going to make a private, a road just to that lot now and not use an easement or anything, and they're not asking for a whole lot. It's going to be abetter project than what was there before. So I'd be on board,yes. MR. MC CABE-Ron? MR.KUHL-I think you made improvements,and I'll support it the way it is,but I often wonder in a project like this,you know,if it got down to where we would say,well, because you're parking a plane under a house and we have no experience with that,would you still do it if you couldn't get your plane in there? MR. HALL-We'd still have the garage there. It's storage for things that you're bringing in from the lake. MR. KUHL-When I looked at the original drawing,it looked like the other side of,where you're going to put your plane,is that also a door to open? MR. HALL-Yes,that goes into the dining area. MR. KUHL-So that when I pull up with my boat I can just go right into the kitchen, right to the refrigerator? MR. HENKEL-Once he builds the dock. MR. PATTEN Just so they match aesthetically. MR. KUHL-Okay. Thank you. I'd be in favor of the way it's presented. MR. MC CABE-Roy? MR. URRICO-Yes,Ron used up all my time. I'd be in favor of it. MR. MC CABE-Bob? MR. KEENAN-I think this is a huge improvement over their last proposal,and I'd support this project. MR. MC CABE-Mary? MRS. PALACINO-I would support it, too. I think you heard what the Board said, and came back with something that's 1000/o better. MR. MC CABEJim? MR. UNDERWOOD-I'm basically in favor of it. It's a large request because of the size of the house,based upon that frontage that you originally had,but I don't think it's out of character. Don Kruger's is pretty long and narrow as it goes down the same way. At the same time,I think,you know,in the future if you pursue other projects on the lake, I would ask you to not come in and do the clear cuts prior to getting approvals,because I think there's always an opportunity to save some of the larger,mature trees and not make it look like a complete whack job on the property,but other than that I'm in favor of the project. MR. MC CABE-And I, too, support the project. I appreciate the effort that you've made to reduce the original request from two to one, and really what we're being asked to give up here is not that much. So with that said,Ron,I wonder if you could make a motion for us here. MR. KUHL-Thank you for the opportunity,Mr. Chairman. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Patten Property Development. (Revised) Applicant proposes to construct a new 2,267 sq ft (footprint) home with 255 sq ft porch/deck area with a floor area of 5,147 sq ft. The existing home has been demolished and there are other items to be demolished as well. The project includes combining an adjoining lot owned by the applicant into the existing lot which will increase the overall lot size from 0.29 acres to a total of 0.76 acres. This combination of lots will provide frontage for the property and allow access directly from Hall Road. Site work includes new septic,well,landscaping,stormwater,and other associated lot disturbance. The project includes a new dock system along Glen Lake. Site plan for hard surfacing within 50 ft of the 6 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) shoreline and new floor area. Relief requested for setbacks,height, and number of garages, and fence type in front yard. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks,height,and number of garages. The project site is to be on a 0.76 ac parcel in the Waterfront Residential(combined two parcels). Section 179-3-40 The new home is to be located 37 ft I inches from the shoreline where a 50 ft setback is required,the height is to be 32 ft 6 inches where the maximum allowed is 2S ft. Relief for the number of garages where one is allowed at 1,100 sf and three are proposed due to the house design less than 1,100 in total.A U-Shaped dock is proposed to be 6 ft 3 inches from the property line project where a 20 ft setback is required. Relief is no longer rcquircd for floor area,road frontagc,and dock as the applicant has combincd two parccls as part of the projcct fora new homc. The fcncc typc and heigh has b ccn revised to b c 4 jt andpickct non privacy. SEQR Type II—no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on April 17,2024,July 17,2024,&October 16,2024. Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-OSO(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 the house really lines up with neighboring properties and it sets well on the property. 2. Feasible alternatives have been considered by the Board. We find them to be reasonable and have been-included to minimize the request. 3. The requested variance is really not that substantial, as, again, the house is lined up with the neighboring houses and the third garage is something that we're going to allow. 4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. 5. The alleged difficulty really you could say it is self-created because of the applicant wanting to have a plane in the third garage. 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,- S. 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. 15-2024 PATTEN PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT, Introduced by Ronald Kuhl, who moved for its adoption,seconded by John Henkel: Duly adopted this 16'Day of October 2024 by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Keenan,Mr. Kuhl,Mrs. Palacino,Mr.Henkel,Mr. Urrico,Mr. Underwood,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Cipperly MR. MC CABE-Congratulations,you have a project. MR. HALL-Thanks very much. We appreciate your time. MR. MC CABE-So our next application is AV 46-2024,Mountain Vista Properties(Chris Racicot),3 thru 21 Foothills Road. 7 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) AREA VARIANCE NO. 46-2024 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II MOUNTAIN VISTA PROPERTIES (CHRIS RACICOT) AGENT(S) ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN PARTNERSHIP (CLARK WILKINSON) OWNER(S) MOUNTAIN VISTA PROPERTIES LLC ZONING MDR LOCATION 3 THRU 21 FOOTHILLS RD. (REVISED) APPLICANT PROPOSES THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO 5-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDINGS FOR 10 TOTAL NEW UNITS. SITE WORK WILL INCLUDE ON-SITE SEPTIC, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, AND CONNECTION TO MUNICIPAL WATER. PROJECT WILL MAINTAIN THE EXISTING 8 UNITS BETWEEN FOUR BUILDINGS; SITE WILL HAVE 18 UNITS. PROJECT INCLUDES MERGER OF TWO LOTS FOR A SITE OF 9.17 ACRES WHERE MULTI-FAMILY BUILDINGS REQUIRE 2 ACRES PER UNIT WITHOUT SEWER AND WATER. SITE PLAN FOR MULTI- FAMILY PROJECT. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR NUMBER OF UNITS ON LOT,DENSITY,AND NUMBER OF UNITS. CROSS REF SP 48-2024; AV 15-1989; SP 64-88 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING AUGUST 2024 LOT SIZE 5.5 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 315.6-2-12 SECTION 179-3- 040 CLARK WILKINSON,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT;CHRIS RACICOT,PRESEN STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff,Area Variance No. 46-2024, Mountain Vista Properties (Chris Racicot), Meeting Date: October 16,2024 "Project Location: 3 thru 21 Foothills Rd. Description of Proposed Project: (Revised) Applicant proposes the construction of two 5-unit apartment buildings for 10 total new units. Site work will include on-site septic, stormwater management, and connection to municipal water. Project will maintain the existing 8 units between four buildings;site will have I8 units. Project includes merger of two lots for a site of 9.17 acres where multi-family buildings require 2 acres per unit without sewer and water. Site plan for multi-family project. Relief requested for number of units on lot and density. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for the construction of 10 new units for the number of units on lot size, density,and number of units. The project parcel is 9.17 ac in the Moderate Density Residential zone. Section 179-3-040 density The applicant requests relief for lot size where 10 units would require 20 ac where sewer and water are not provided requires 2 ac per unit. The existing number of units is 8 and the additional 10 units for a total of 18 units where 36 ac would be required. The lot size of 9.17 ac where 0.51 ac per unit is proposed. Number of units proposed is I8 overall where the maximum allowed is 4 units. 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 impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated with the number of units proposed. 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 to minimize the number of units proposed. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered substantial relevant to the code. Relief requested for the density where 9.17 ac is existing and 36 ac would be required;relief requested for 1.49 ac per unit. Number of units proposed is I8 overall where the maximum allowed is 4 units. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor impacts to the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated. Each building will be connected to an onsite septic and additional clearing is proposed for the locations of the buildings and septics. The existing cul-de-sac is proposed to be used for traffic. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes to construct two new buildings with 5 units each. The units will each have a garage and three bedrooms. The plans show the location of the existing 8 units within four buildings plus two residential garages and a site garage." 8 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) MR. WILKINSON-For the record my name is Clark Wilkinson with the Environmental Design Partnership,representing this project. Next to me is the owner,Chris Racicot,one of the partners in the Foothills application. As you recall I was here a couple of months ago and had a discussion about the project. At that time we showed three apartment buildings on this project,with a total of 12 additional units. We listened to the discussion, there was also someone from the audience, a neighbor to the northeast,but he had indicated to try to leave more buffer,because at that time we only had 25 feet on his side. So we have listened to you. We've cut back to two buildings,eliminating two of the buildings. So we're now down to 2 five for a total of 10 units. Again, the footprint of one building is equal to, approximately equal to one of the duplexes plus the garages, and if you recall the garage is tucked underneath. There's a garage underneath. It's a townhouse style apartment. So we're here tonight to try to discuss this project and get approval for the variance,and again,what we've done is reduced the overall footprint and we've also provided more buffer to the north. We've doubled it to 50 feet and we intend to keep it that way, and we can also put that into the deed if necessary. So with that I'll turn it over to the Board for questions and comments. MR. HENKEL-I've got questions. How many total bedrooms are there going to be? MR.WILKINSON-Three,two and a half bath. MR. HENKEL-Okay. So there's three bedrooms in each of those. How many bedrooms total is there going to be in that area between,how many bedrooms do you have in the duplexes now there,then? MR. RACICOT-Those are two,but those have a full basement,too. MR. HENKEL-Okay. So you're going to have three bedrooms in each. MR. RACICOT-So the ones that are currently there,those are two bed,one and a half bath,and the garage is separate in the middle. The new ones are three up,two baths up and a half bath on the first floor,no basement. MR. HENKEL-Okay. Thank you. MR. KUHL-And the new units are four dwelling units in each unit? MR. RACICOT-Five. MR. KUHL-Five. MR.WILKINSON-So instead of bring more space over,he did two buildings instead of three. MR. KUHL-The picture you show me has four front doors. MRS. MOORE-The picture has to be updated. MR. KUHL-Well see,I don't have the correct. MR. HENKEL-I was wondering where the other door was,too. MR. KUHL-So you're going starting with a 900/o efficiency. MRS. MOORE-I did identify that they needed to update their drawings. MR. KUHL-Thankyou. MR.MC CABE-Other questions? Hearing none,a public hearing has been advertised. So at this particular time I'm going to open the public hearing and see if there's anybody in the audience that would like to approach us on this particular project. And I see someone, so if you guys would like to give up the table there. PUBLIC HEARING OPEN DENISE ROMEU MS. ROMEU-Hi, my name is Denise Romeu. I live on 1S Goldfinch Road. So I'd be backing up to this property, and it seems like an awfully big property for the area that is behind us and when we moved in we were told it was forever wild with all this space back here,and apparently that forever wild has gotten smaller. I'm concerned with the size of these buildings,people coming in. There's paths back there that 9 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) people walk on,but there are dogs and stuff. That's going to be eliminated. I'm just concerned with the amount and size of the property. People already have lots on Goldfinch Road that face this property. MR. MC CABE-Okay. ANITA DELISLE MS. DELISLE-Hi. I'm Anita Delisle. I'm also a resident. I live at 12 Goldfinch Road and also I spoke with my neighbors,Audrey and Dave that also live on Goldfinch Road and everyone is,that we've talked to,that we know on Goldfinch Road that is close to this being built,Number One,because it is forever wild back there, we were told when we moved in that no one would be building behind us. Number Two, my backyard is my quiet place. I purchased this, the largest purchase you make in your life is buying your property, and that is my, where I, you know, have my peace and quiet, and I don't want some noisy neighbors out back right on top of us. If I want to live where people live on top of me, I would have purchased a home in a development such. This is not a development that was built with houses on top of each other. That is why we purchased homes there. All of the residents feel the same way about that. We're worried that people that rent there are not the homeowners and they will not have the care, take that care that a homeowner would take,you know renters don't often think of other people that they live around. Like she said there are paths back there that we neighbors use and everything. We like the wild. We like the trees. We want them to remain,and it would bean infringement on my sanctuary,my home, if that was built right behind my property, and that is very close. We went out back and we looked at where they were starting to test out there. That is very close to our homes,and forever wild,I mean exactly what is forever wild,two feet? MR. HENKEL-Who told you that was forever wild? In what writing did that, did someone put that in a contract and state that was going to be forever wild? MS. DELISLE-It was in the listings and we're not the only ones, but other people have children that couldn't come. They wanted to come,but if you survey neighbors,if you put out a survey for them to write and sign,you're going to find that people that live backed up to this do not want this. I don't appreciate it and I don't think that just somebody trying to make money should override what this area is. We're the Adirondacks. It's a small property,too. It's not that big. MR. HENKEL-But you realize it's a vacant piece of property, and if you're walking on somebody else's property that's not really right either. Right? MS. DELISLE-We pay dues. MR. HENKEL-Not on that property,though. MS. DELISLE-The person that has been collecting the dues that we pay said that this, this Homeowners Association dues that we pay are for insurance in case someone gets hurt in the forever wild behind our homes,as well as for the green space out front,all right,to maintain that,mow it. So we were always led to believe that no one would be building back there and that,you know,we could walk back there. MR. KUHL-I don't want to get argumentative,but how much of a buffer do you have on your property to your property line,or have you clear cut your property right to your property line? Because you can't buy views, and the person that told you forever wild is probably long gone. I'm sorry,but if you do not want to have to view the neighboring properties,it behooves you to put up some natural break. MS. DELISLE-So you're saying put up a fence. MR. KUHL-Not a fence, plant trees, but it seems like the first people that come in, they clear cut their property,and then when somebody wants to develop the one behind them,they say well they should leave a buffer. I would hope that you have a buffer. MR. MC CABE-We've got to stop this. This is negotiation. We've taken your input. Is there anything further? MS. DELISLE-Inspiration Park is the development that we're in. So I don't know if you can move that up on the buffers for the property class,but I've seen some of the construction going on. It's extremely close to our property lines. We'd like more of a buffer at least. It's a small space. I don't understand why we have to take every little bit of greenery that we have in this city and turn it into something else. MR. MC CAB E-I understand. We hearyou. MR. HENKEL-The lots you guys live on are only about a quarter of an acre. Aren't they? MS. DELISLE-Yes. 10 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) MR. HENKEL-Yes. MR. MC CABE-Is there anybody else that would like to speak? Go ahead. DAVID FIELD MR. FIELD-I had a hard time hearing earlier. David Field. I live at 661 Corinth Road, which is to the north of where they're proposing. Did I hear right? They're adding another apartment building to the two, the meeting prior they had three buildings with four apartments per unit. So now they're down to two units with an extra,with five apartments per unit,correct? MR. HENKEL-Yes. MR. FIELD-What's the lot size they need per unit? MR. MC CABE-So that's the issue here. That's what they're asking for. MR. FIELD-Right. So they're asking to have a decrease so they can build. MR. MC CABE-Right. MR. FIELD-Okay. And did I also hear right that there's going to be three bedrooms per apartment? MR. MC CABE-Right. MR. FIELD-So that's 15 bedrooms per unit. MR. HENKEL-Thirty total. MR. FIELD-Thirty total. So that's, all right, so what I'm concerned about is the traffic on Corinth Road, the buses every morning. I don't know if anybody's ever driven that, but I'm sure these apartments are going to have children that have to get on buses. It's backed up,sometimes miles,and they don't pullover, I mean traffic. It's hard for me to get to work on time every morning. I mean I have to leave early for this reason,just to dodge elementary,junior high,senior high and once again,rules are rules. They have to have so much property to build this,I mean,wildlife. If it's not forever wild,there's a lot of wildlife back there. There's a lot of,and I don't think 50 feet from the north is enough buffer for me. They went from 25 to 50. I would like 100. MR. MC CABE-Sure. MR. FIELD-And not only that, there's going to be 15 more families back there, or excuse me, 10 more families back there,which means an awful lot more people,and we all know how it is. Eventually there's going to be problems. There's going to be,you know,it's just, I'm totally against it, and I guess I can go with that right there,and as I said before,they need so much to do this and they're asking for you to bend the rules. MR. MC CABE-Everybody that comes here is looking to bend the rules. MR. FIELD-Rules are rules. MR. MC CAB E-We wouldn't have a job then. Do we have anybody else that would like to speak on this particular project? So is there anything written,Roy? MR. URRICO-No written comment. MR. MC CABE-So would you guys come back and like to comment on the comments. MS. DELISLE-Can I ask one more question? MR. MC CABE-You don't ask questions. You provide input to us. That's what a public hearing is. MR. RACICOT-Could I answer a few questions? MR. MC CABE-Certainly. MR. RACICOT-So I believe the wildlife that they're talking about,if you look just below our property line there,that's like,maybe 20 feet,that's the wildlife that they're talking about that they deeded back then, and I do have posted signs everywhere so nobody gets hurt on those trails,because the trails are on that 11 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) land,and for the people itself,I personally take care of the property. I maintain the property. I mow it. I do all the snow. I make sure everything's where it should be,just for the fact that I want to be there and make sure everything is where it should be,nobody leaves anything out that shouldn't be there. Everybody we have right now is great. If you haven't heard anything yet, those are the kind of people that I try to look for,young famines,anybody. I just had an apartment,Number Five was available,and in the first 24 hours I got 53 applicants. So that just goes to show that we might be doing better on getting more apartments,but we're not maybe completely there. Yes,we are trying to get it a little better zoning on it, but we also,we're hoping to just be a little bit more fair to the surrounding,of what everybody else has per, you know, a third or a half an acre and whatnot. So just a little bit more than four,but,you know,I feel like we did give, and we completely did not touch that whole side now. So all the trees that are staying there that originally were going to be cut are going to stay. We moved the dumpster pad so that wasn't in the way or in his sight,but, I mean,it is on its own road. Corinth Road is busy as it is, and it always will be because of everybody coming down Call Street,but I take a lot of pride in the people that I get and that they respect the area as much as I do. I grew up on this side and I'd like to keep it the same way just maybe add a few more families,because if they don't come here they'll go somewhere else. MS. DELISLE-Could I add something? MR. MC CABE-Sure. MS. DELISLE-We live there. So we know. Anita Delisle. We live there and we know what kind of, there's all kinds of noise from, I can hear his blower for like two or three hours over there. They have, it sounds like live big music concerts back there. My neighbor was putting down her baby and all of a sudden they just blared this music. So his interpretation could be a little bit different than the interpretation of the people that actually live there and are hearing the noise from the existing apartments already,and I'm not saying that they're bad people. I'm just saying that adding more to this is going to add quite a bit to the noise pollution in that area, and we are totally against that. I would like to enjoy my property and I want to know would you buy my house with all this behind it? Would you want to live there? MR. MC CABE-Okay. You've made your point. MS. DELISLE-Thankyou. MR. MC CABE-Anything else? Anybody else that would like to speak? MR. URRICO-I have a question. How do you monitor the use of your yard? We talked about the inside, but what about the outside? MR. RACICOT-So the outside, so when, I bought it a few years ago and anybody that's left, that's still there,you know,they didn't have a whole lot of stuff outside. MR. URRICO-I mean the use of it. Are your tenants allowed to use the backyard facilities? MR. RACICOT-Yes. Rarely anybody does. MR. URRICO-How is it monitored? MR. RACICOT-So nobody can leave anything outside unless you are an existing tenant,which only three out of the eight currently are, and anybody else that does that has to bring their stuff back inside, and there's never anything outside,other than I'd say three units,and they have a one and a half year old and a six month old or something,a two year old and a six month old. There's a place out behind Number Seven or Number Fifteen, and she's grown, and they haven't used that in, since I bought it. It's just been there, but anybody new, they're not allowed to leave tables and nobody hangs out there because they'd have to drag the tables out and a lot of people don't like to do that. So nobody's just hanging out usually outside, and that's in my lease that nobody can,you can use whatever you have in your garage that you'd like to, but you cannot leave it out there as a fixed fixture. MR. MC CABE-So,we all set? MR. URRICO-Yes. 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 Jim. 12 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) MR. UNDERWOOD-I think if we looked at this from a strict viewpoint of what the Code says,you know, you're allowed four more units on site here, I think that, you know,what you propose is less than what you proposed last time,but I still think you could go down to one 5 unit and that would be more acceptable to me,but I wouldn't approve two more units of five. MR. MC CABS John? MR.HENKEL-I'm looking at this a little differently. There's 10 homes bordering the property on one side, and you've got 6 homes on the other side,and they all probably have at least three bedrooms each, so,you know,you're looking at 1S and 30. So you're looking at 4S bedrooms with people. You've got pools in many of those yards,which,talking about noise,there's going to be more noise from those pools bordering that property than,there's not going to be any pools at this new development. So I think,you know,and we can't stop development. There's a lot of vacant property on the west side of the Northway and it's just going to keep on being developed,and there's going to be more people coming in developing,like Cerrone coming in,buying massive pieces of property and building many houses. So we're not going to stop growth. I think what he's presenting here is a pretty good project. So I'd be definitely on board as is. MR. MC CABE-Ron? MR. KUHL-When I went and looked at this,I thought the original three buildings were good,you know, you've reduced it. It's a shame about the neighboring people. I have family members,grandsons,all three of them rent. My guess is that, I heard you say that you only owned it for two years,but I'd be willing to bet that the longevity,the amount of time that people are renting today,is a lot longer than one year ago, and I didn't ask you that question because you said you only owned it for two years. I'm sorry for the people that are on the street,but I think it's a good project and I think the area suits it. So I'm in favor of it as it is. MR. MC CABE-Roy? MR. URRICO-I'm against the project. I think this Area Variance is substantial. It's going to create too many units on too small a piece of property. Per our Code,it's there for a reason,and I also think the density is going to make it even worse. So I would be against the project. I would be more inclined to what Jim had suggested,but as presented I'm against it. MR. MC CABE-Bob? MR. KEENAN-This is a difficult one because I think it's a good spot for,good location for such a project, but I still think it's a little too big per our Zoning Code. One building with six units I'd be more in favor of or some kind of reduction in,you know,smaller footprint than what is happening,just to help with the neighbors. MR. MC CABE-Mary? MRS.PALACINO-When you look at what you're looking to do,it looks good,and I have both rented over the years, and owned. So I appreciate the woods factor in a community setting. I also value privacy and quiet in my own home when I had one. I just think that the number of units you're looking to put on this space is too much. I would not be in favor. MR. MC CABE-You don't quite have enough votes here. MR. WILKINSON-I'd like to make a few comments, too. First of all, we're talking about, I think Ron brought this up as well. Where they live in Goldfinch,those are 50,000 square foot lots. If you recall the last time I gave you a map of this subdivision,size of lots all the way around,and again,our argument was that this project fits within. We're asking for one unit per half acre,and most of the lots around here are less than a half acre around the whole perimeter of the site. So again,I felt we've done a good job in trying to preserve as much as possible to our neighbors and do the minimal amount of disturbance and the development as close to the existing road as we can. There are requirements for stormwater and stuff, which is why there's more clearing than we would have done for just the use. Also there is an additional buffer behind those lots on Goldfinch. I believe it's like 35 to 50 feet. I don't remember the exact number. Prior to our property,which we're providing at that point,we're providing an additional 75 feet. So they virtually have about a 100 foot buffer on that side. Again, I think I agree with Thomas that panelist that sat down here, about the fact that this does fit into the neighborhood. There's already multi-family housing on this road, and it appears as though this road was constructed and only half developed, and so what we're trying to do is put more multi-family housing in the Town of Queensbury that actually has a very, very high need for multi-family housing apartments and things like that. So that's why we're presenting the project, and I'm hoping that some of my comments can at least alleviate some of the issues that some of the Board members have. If there's other comments and things or other questions that you have,I'd be open to answering them. 13 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) MR. MC CABE-So I think the general consensus is there's just too many units. MR. URRICO-We've already polled the Board. I don't want to re-litigate,re-argue this. MR. MC CABE-We're just listening to his comments. MR. WILKINSON=The other comment that I have is that there is no provision in the zoning when you have one public utility. There are in many other towns. If you have public water,you get a little bit of a relief from the minimum required zoning. I also know that when that project went in,when it was first developed,when the zoning in this acre was one acre zoning and now it's two acre zone,again,all of these things in the development from Hudson Pointe and the other project to our south there, they all got in when the zoning was whatever it was,but they have smaller lots,and again,that's why we're arguing that this does fit within the neighborhood intent,and this is not that many. MR. MC CABE-So I understand. So you have a choice. We can do a vote,but that's probably not going to go your way,or you can table this and take a look at maybe some other arrangement. It's up to you. MR. RACICOT-I would request to table it at this time. MR. MC CABE-Okay. So,John. MR. HENKEL-We have to find a date. MRS. MOORE-So the next agenda that would be available is December's agenda. MR. MC CABE-December. MRS. MOORE-So November 15`h would be that deadline. MR. MC CABE-There's only one meeting in December. MR. HENKEL-Okay. December 1S`h then. MRS. MOORE-Yes. Correct,December 1S`h is the only meeting in December. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Mountain Vista Properties(Chris Racicot). (Revised)Applicant proposes the construction of two apartment buildings, each with 5 units,for a total of 10 units. Site work will include septic systems, stormwater management, and connection to municipal water. Project will also maintain the existing S units,making 1S total units for the site. Project also includes the merger of two lots for a site of 9.17 acres where multi-family buildings require 2 acres per unit without sewer and water. Site plan for a multi-family project. Relief requested for number of units on lot size,density,and number of units. MOTION TO TABLE AREA VARIANCE NO.46-2024 MOUNTAIN VISTA PROPERTIES(CHRIS RACICOT ,Introduced by John Henkel who moved for its adoption,seconded by Mary Palacino: Tabled until December 1S`h,2024 with any new information by November 15`h,2024. Duly adopted this 16`h day of October,2024,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Kuhl,Mr. Underwood,Mr.Keenan,Mrs.Palacino,Mr. Henkel,Mr. Urrico,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Cipperly MRS. MOORE-You'll need to open the public hearing again. MR.MC CABE-So withyour permission,I'm going to re-open the public hearing so we can have even more discussion. PUBLIC HEARING RE-OPENED MR.WILKINSON-Thank you for your time. MR. MC CABE-Sure. So our next application is AV 52-2024,Lowe's,251 Quaker Road. NEW BUSINESS: 14 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) AREA VARIANCE NO. 52-2024 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II LOWE'S HOME CENTERS LLC AGENT(S) PERRY PETRILLO OWNER(S) LOWE'S HOME CENTERS INC. ZONING Cl LOCATION 251 QUAKER RD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO MODIFY AN APPROVED PLAN&z REQUEST TO MAINTAIN OUTDOOR STORAGE AREAS. THE STORAGE AREAS TO BE MAINTAINED NEAR THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE ALONG THE EDGE OF THE PAVEMENT AND EXTENDS FROM THE WEST TO THE EAST ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING. THE 3 TRAILER PODS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING ARE ALSO TO REMAIN, ALONG WITH A RECYCLING TRAILER ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING. THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING IN THE EXISTING PARKING LOT INCLUDES AN AREA FOR PERMANENT STORAGE OF BAGGED GOODS ALONG WITH AN AREA FOR PERMANENT STORAGE OF SHEDS. THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PARKING LOT (6 ROWS) WILL BE USED FOR SEASONAL STORAGE FROM MARCH IST THRU SEPT IST. ALSO ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING AREA IS TO BE A PERMANENT AREA FOR STORAGE OF UTILITY TRAILERS. THE PARKING AREA HAS DESIGNATED SPACES FOR PRO PARKING, VETERAN'S RESERVED SPACES,AND CURBSIDE PICKUP SPACES. PARKING FOR THE SITE IS REDUCED FROM 623 SPACES TO 352 SPACES. SITE PLAN FOR MODIFICATION OF AN APPROVED PLAN FOR EXISTING OUTDOOR STORAGE CONDITIONS. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. CROSS REF SP 59-2024; SP(M) 29-1997; SP 29-1997 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING OCTOBER 2024 LOT SIZE 25.30 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 296.20-1-50.1 SECTION 179-3-040;179-4-090 PERRY PETRILLO,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT;SCOTT POWELL,PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff,Area Variance No.52-2024,Lowe's Home Centers LLC,Meeting Date: October 16,2024 "Project Location: 251 Quaker Rd. Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to modify an approved plan&r request to maintain outdoor storage areas. The storage areas to be maintained near the northern property line along the edge of the pavement and extends from the west to the east on the north side of the building. The 3 trailer pods on the north side of the building are also to remain, along with a recycling trailer on the east side of the building. The west side of the building in the existing parking lot includes an area for permanent storage of bagged goods along with an area for permanent storage of sheds. The south side of the parking lot(6 rows)will be used for seasonal storage from March Ist thru Sept. Ist. Also on the south side of the building area is to be a permanent area for storage utility trailers.The parking area has designated spaces for pro parking,veteran's reserved spaces,and curbside pickup spaces.Parking for the site is reduced from 623 spaces to 352 spaces. Site plan for modification of an approved plan for existing outdoor storage conditions. Relief requested for number of parking spaces. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for the number of parking spaces to maintain outdoor storage areas. Project site is located at 251 Quaker Road on a 25.30 ac parcel in the Commercial Intensive zone. Section 179-3-040 CI,179-4-090 Parkingg The applicant proposes to maintain 352 parking spaces where 623 were required. 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 little 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 limited to reduce exterior storage. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief may be considered substantial relevant to the code. Relief for 271 parking spaces. 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 to no 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. 15 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) Staff comments: The applicant proposes the exterior storage on the north property,the west property area is proposed to remain with permanent storage area of goods, then the front west area of property is also include some permanent storage and some temporary storage. The plans show the locations of the storage areas. The board may have further discussions in regards to pedestrian access crossing the drive aisle for the entrance to Lowes parking area." MR. URRICO-And 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 October 15`h 2024 by a seven,zero margin. MR. PETRILLO-Perry Petrillo, Perry M. Petrillo Architects. We're the architects for the project. Strangely enough I originally did the store in'9S when it was built. With me is Mr. Powell. He's the store manager. He's been the store manager since July of'23. So just a little over a year. As mentioned,we're here for a parking variance. So currently,and I think everybody on the Board has a copy of the plan. Does it show the shading in blue? Because unfortunately it doesn't show upon here. Okay. So obviously we've got the area from here to the north end here we're looking for some permanent storage,and then a section across the building. What we have done,this is anew plan that was submitted. We've gone through and made sure that we've got at least 26 feet clear on all our areas for the drive aisle.. When we were here last night before the Planning Board they did give us the Fire Marshal letter which we didn't have previously. We will comply with all of that and we will respond to all of that. The one major comment on there regarding the FDC access,Mr. Powell made sure that was clean last night and it's cleaned up today. Sol just wanted the Board to know that we did address that and all the other items. We don't have an issue with making sure we comply. The area shaded here was a variance I believe that was obtained in'99 for some outdoor storage that they currently have there. The area around that, those parking spaces, those are the ones that we're looking to use as permanent storage. The ones out front would be seasonal from March to September. There is a section here that we show some red spaces that we're also looking for some permanent to store the trailers, and when I say trailers there, the utility trailers, not the ones, the ones for sale,and there's an area over here in red where we show, and those are permanent,for some shed displays we do maintain. What's important to point out,too,is we kind of updated this plan a little bit from what was original. I don't know if anybody had come before the Board in the past for the additional spaces that were changed or modified here. There's some pro trailer parking here. There's some pro parking spaces here, and then there's customer pick up spaces in front here/ They're slightly modified from what the original plan was. Our total that we have over here of parking spaces of 60S is a little different if you use the original numbers,but we went out there and physically counted spaces,and those were the spaces we came up with. So we just wanted to make sure the Board understood where that number came from. It wasn't sort of arbitrary. We did physically do a count and see what was there. With regard to the Board's comments,we did not see any impact on neighboring properties either. This is kind of part of what's here already. The ability to change this is,yes,possibly, exterior storage,but I think the key part to all of this is that,you know,right now we're after the season. This is all cleaned up out here and open parking. The spaces here that become seasonal turnover spaces is roughly 15S of them. So that what is it,352 number,obviously goes up by 15S after the seasonal parking is completed. Soto say that the variance is a reduced number to 352,it's just a little deceiving because it's not year round. It's just for a part of the year. Can we switch to the aerial? So I think this aerial is important to look at. So the date on this aerial,unfortunately it doesn't show up here,but it's from Google Earth,and it's from 5/23/23. So it's right before Memorial Day weekend,which is one of their busiest times of the year. Now Mr.Powell was not the manager at this time, and I will say that the arrangement of goods here is a little haphazard and it looks a little in disarray. I think he's done a great job organizing this as he's taken over and along the back here,but the reason I bring this up is because this area here they're showing most of this already as stocked goods and goods out here,and you can see how many parking spaces are still open in the parking held, and I did bring to Mr. Powell's attention and asked the question if they ever had,or he has had any issues with customers coming in and saying we can't find any parking spaces or people circling the lot,and there has not been a concern. They seem to always have available parking. Are there busier days? Absolutely,but for the most part there are parking spaces to be had. MR. URRICO-Can I ask a question? I'm sorry to interrupt. How many cars do you estimate are in that? MR. PETRILLO-If I had to guess, somewhere in the 250,200 range. Because if I take this area out of it,I know that I've got this being left at 352 parking spaces,and I would say maybe maximum we're two thirds full or somewhere in that neighborhood. So, yes, you can see, I mean this end down here is basically virtually completely open,and there is additional parking in here also. With regard to the variance having an adverse impact or effect on the physical or environmental conditions,we don't see that either. This is basically minimal impact. The parking is there already where the area is paved. We're not changing any of the coverage or anything of that nature. While I'm talking about that, I think one important part to bring up is that Lowe's also did solicit a proposal to come out,they had a landscape company come out and do a whole survey of the property and a proposal was put together to replace all the dead trees on the property along with additional plantings and property clean up. So that is going to take place in early spring,but that is on the agenda to be done also. So that's part of this. The last question that they had 16 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) was whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. Well I think the important part to understand here, and Mr.Powell can answer any questions if you have any,is that given where we are,today's times,things have changed a little bit after COVID obviously, but a lot more people order product on line, and that product that comes in to them has to get staged and then basically get delivered. This area in the back here,a lot of this product or most of this product is staged for bulk goods for,come in,and they get delivered to a customer. So there's a change in business model there a little bit from when this was built 25,26 years ago,and again,I think the big thing here is that Mr.Powell has done a great job of organizing and cleaning up the presentation of the product in the parking lot and we hope that you see it the same way. MR. MC CABE-Okay. So do we have questions besides Roy's? He jumped the gun here. MR. KUHL-Define permanent. Is that the yellow boxes you have on the north side, is that what your permanent storage is going to be? MR. PETRILLO-Tell me what you're referring to are the yellow boxes. MR. KUHL-You have the yellow containers on the north end. I go around the back when I go to Applebee's so I drive through that 2S feet. MR.PETRILLO-So there is some containers,yes. The permanent storage would be a couple of containers on site. MR.KUHL-That's what I'm asking. Is the permanent storage,Mr.Powell,going to be containers like that? MR. POWELL-We would like for it to be,yes. MR.KUHL-Okay. I mean basically you're not going to be building structure. You're going to bring in the stuff in a permanent. MR. PETRILLO-But it may also be large palleted goods that needs to be delivered. Correct? MR. POWELL-That's what it is,yes. MR. KUHL-I mean the palleted goods are there now against the building. Your lumber is always by your lumber yard,right? MR. POWELL-It's primarily by the fixtures that we don't want laying around the building. MR. KUHL-Correct,but again,I'm just asking you to define permanent. What is permanent going to be? Is there going to be those yellow containers? MR.PETRILLO-I think permanent is the use of or having the ability to have the containers there,and also the permanent ability to lay down some large bulk items that are staging for delivery. MR. KUHL-Thankyou,Mr.Powell. MRS. MOORE-I just want to clarify. So the plan clearly says it's bagged goods on pallets and trailer pods. So it's both. Okay. MR. MC CABE-Other questions? MR.HENKEL-I've got a Staff question. That Code book is huge. I looked through it. There's nothing in there that says anything about large box storage or anything that can utilize space in parking lots. There's nothing like that. Right? There's not where they have a right to use a percentage? MRS. MOORE-So it would be called a shed, and so it's a permanent shed. So there is. I would call it a shed. Craig would call it a shed. MR. HENKEL-Maybe we can come up with a square footage that they're potentially allowed to. MRS. MOORE-So it doesn't, and commercial zones, all sheds require Site Plan Review. There's no limit on he size of a shed in a commercial zone. MR. HENKEL-Gotcha. Okay. MR. KUHL-They've been doing this storage for years. Why do they have to come here now? MRS. MOORE-Because it's been a violation for all those years. 17 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) MR. MC CABE-Other questions? Are there other questions? MR. URRICO-I just want to go back to that photo you showed. So that photo you showed was basically what the configuration is going to be with the 300 and so spaces. Right? So that's pretty much what we're seeing here. People are not going to need an Uber to get to the front of the building from the parking lot. But seriously,though,there's often carts involved,people taking carts out to their cars or some flacks and all. Are you going to be able to get to them in a decent amount of time or without any struggle? MR. POWELL-Sure. MR. URRICO-You'll have plenty of space for that,to negotiate that parking lot? MR. PETRILLO-In our parking count we also included the cart corrals, and they are accounted for. So they are not part of the 352. We deducted them out. MR.URRICO-And then you also mentioned the new way people shop. Sometimes they're picking up their goods also. Do they also go to that area where you have the veteran parking? MR. PETRILLO-No. Those are the parking spaces in front here that are on your plan marked CP. MR. URRICO-Okay. So those are already laid out and set aside already. MR. PETRILLO-Correct. MR. URRICO-Okay. MR. MC CABE-Other questions? So a public hearing has been advertised. So at this particular time I'm going to open the public hearing and see if there's anybody out there that would like to address us on this particular project. Seeing no one,Roy,do we have anything written? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. URRICO-No,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 Bob. MR. KEENAN-I think obviously it's been in this situation for quite a while, and it's been my experience being at Lowe's,I guess I don't have a problem with the project at this point. MR. MC CABE-Mary? MRS. PALACINO-Yes,I don't have an issue with it, either. I think,you know, I've been there. I know where you have your temporary display set up in the parking lot. I've never gone in and had to park in Applebee's to get there. MR. MC CABE Jim? MR. UNDERWOOD-I mean I've used the services of Lowe's since you built the place, and working for other contractors, working on my own, I don't think it's ever been a problem. I think it's useful for a delivery of the products that you're trying to get out. It's understandable what you've done and expanding over the years,but I think it's perfectly logical. I don't see any problems with it. MR. MC CABEJohn? MR. HENKEL-I can see it's definitely gotten better this past year. In the past stuff used to be scattered all over and you couldn't navigate very good. I'd go in there with a 30 foot trailer to pick up stuff at times, and I've had problems before,but that seems like it's gotten better and we're very lucky to have Lowe's in our community. So I'm on board. MR. KUHL-I have no problem with this project,Mr. Chairman. MR. MC CABE-Okay. Roy? 18 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) MR. URRICO-I'm in favor of the project. I think this is a leftover from the days when we had a lot of parking spaces for some of these projects,K-Mart,there was K-Mart right around that same time. So I'd be in favor of this project. MR. MC CABE-I've never seen the parking lot full in there. In fact I don't think I've ever seen it three- quarters full. So I'll support the project. So, with that in mind, Mary,you haven't made a motion in a while. Would you like to make a motion? MRS. PALACINO-Thank you,sir,for calling on me. I appreciate the opportunity. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Lowe's Home Centers LLC. Applicant proposes to modify an approved plan & request to maintain outdoor storage areas. The storage areas to be maintained near the northern property line along the edge of the pavement and extends from the west to the east on the north side of the building.The 3 trailer pods on the north side of the building are also to remain, along with a recycling trailer on the east side of the building. The west side of the building in the existing parking lot includes an area for permanent storage of bagged goods along with an area for permanent storage of sheds. The south side of the parking lot(6 rows)will be used for seasonal storage from March Ist thru Sept. Ist. Also, on the south side of the building area is to be a permanent area for storage utility trailers.The parking area has designated spaces for pro parking,veteran's reserved spaces,and curbside pickup spaces.Parking for the site is reduced from 623 spaces to 352 spaces. Site plan for modification of an approved plan for existing outdoor storage conditions. Relief requested for number of parking spaces. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for the number of parking spaces to maintain outdoor storage areas. Project site is located at 251 Quaker Road on a 25.30 ac parcel in the Commercial Intensive zone. Section 179-3-040 CI,179-4-090 Parkingg The applicant proposes to maintain 352 parking spaces where 623 were required. SEQR Type II—no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on October 16,2024. Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-OSO(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 looking to verify changes that have been made a number of years ago and are not a detriment to the neighborhood. 2. Feasible alternatives have been considered and that's what they've come up with. 3. The requested variance is not substantial because the number of parking spaces that they will be having is still greater than the total customer traffic flow at any given time. 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 just because business is so good. 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,- S. 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. 52-2024 LOWE'S HOME CENTERS LLC, Introduced by Mary Palacino,who moved for its adoption, seconded by Ronald Kuhl: Duly adopted this 16'Day of October 2024 by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Henkel,Mr.Keenan,Mr. Kuhl,Mr. Underwood,Mrs. Palacino,Mr. Urrico,Mr. McCabe 19 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Cipperly MR. MC CABE-Congratulations,you have a project. MR. PETRILLO-Thank you,sir. MR. POWELL-Thankyou,Board. MR. MC CABE-So our next application is AV 59-2024,Tamara Sutphin/384 Ridge Road. AREA VARIANCE NO.59-2024 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II OWNER(S) TAMARA SUTPHIN/384 RIDGE LLC ZONING MDR LOCATION 384 RIDGE RD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REPLACE 941 SQ. FT. FLAT ROF WITH A PEAKED ROOF AS THE CURRENT ROOF IS LEAKING. THERE ARE NO OTHER CHANGES PROPOSED TO THE EXISTING 941 SQ. FT. (FOOTPRINT)BUILDING. THE EXISTING BUILDING IS ABOUT 12 FT.IN HEIGHT AND WITH THE NEW ROOF AT THE PEAK WILL BE ABOUT 20 FT.IN HEIGHT. THE EXISTING ROOF IS TO BE REMOVED AND THE NEW ROOF WITH TRUSSES WILL BE PLACED ON TOP WITH SIDING TO BE VINYL SHAKE. SITE PLAN FOR NEW FACADE ON EXISTING BUILDING. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR SETBACKS. CROSS REF SP 63-2024;2024-0484;AV 8-2011;UV 77- 1992; AV 83-1992 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING OCTOBER 2024 LOT SIZE 0.23 ACRES TAX MAP NO.297.17-1-47 SECTION 179-3-040 TAMARA SUTPHIN,PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff,Area Variance No.59-2024,Tamara Sutphin/384 Ridge LLC,Meeting Date: October 16, 2024 "Project Location: 384 Ridge Rd. Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to replace 941 sq ft flat roof with a peaked roof as the current roof is leaking. There are no other changes proposed to the existing 941 sq ft(footprint)building. The existing building is about 12 ft in height and with the new roof at the peak will be about 20 ft in height. The existing roof is to be removed and the new roof with trusses will be placed on top with siding to be vinyl shake. Site plan for new facade on existing building. Relief requested for setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks for the replacement of a flat roof with a peaked roof. The project site is located at 384 Ridge Road on a 0.23 ac parcel in the Moderate Density Residential. The site has approved Use Variance for a commercial business in the MDR zone,Use Variance 77-1992. Section 179-3-040 MDR The new roof requires relief from the side yard where 4.3 ft is proposed and 25 ft is required,then the rear yard where 9.8 ft is proposed and 30 ft is required. 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 character 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 limited due to the current location of the building. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code. Relief is side setback 20.7 ft and rear setback is 20.2 ft. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: 20 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) The applicant proposes replacement of a flat roof with a new peaked roof to reduce rain damage to the building. The plans show the location of the existing building. The elevation views were provided showing the existing roofing setup and the proposed roofing plan." MS.SUTPHIN-Good evening. I'm Tamara,Tammy,Sutphin. town the building at 384 Ridge Road which currently houses my daughter's hair salon business. So she's been in there since I purchased the building about 11 years ago. It has a flat roof. In the 11 years we've owned the building,it's been a battle,to try to get,we've had repairs done, and have not been successful with the leaking. So we're seeking to put this peaked roof on to resolve the issue. MR. MC CABE-Pretty straightforward. So do we have questions? Seeing none, I'm going to open the public hearing and poll the audience and see if there's anybody that would like to address us on this particular project. Do we have anything written,Roy? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. URRICO-No written comment. There is a Planning Board resolution that, did not identify any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with the current project proposal, and that was adopted October 15`h,2024 by a unanimous vote. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. MC CABE-So I'm going to poll the Board,and I'm going to start with you,Roy. MR. URRICO-No,problem. I'm in favor. MR. MC CABE-Ron? MR. KUHL-I have no problem with it. I think it's because of the offsets. MR. MC CABE John? MR. HENKEL-It totally makes sense. It's better than the one we had, back a few years ago we had somebody put a second story onto fix their leaky roof. Sothis is abetter deal with a peaked roof. MR. MC CABEJim? MR. UNDERWOOD-A logical solution to an ongoing problem. MR. MC CABE-Mary? MRS. PALACINO-Easy yes. MR. MC CABE-Bob? MR. KEENAN-I think this is a good project. I think it will make a nice change to the property. MR.MC CABE-And I'm always in favor of fixing leaky roofs. With that in mind,Jim,I wonder if you could make a motion for us here. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Tamara Sutphin / 384 Ridge LLC. Applicant proposes to replace 941 sq It flat roof with a peaked roof as the current roof is leaking. There are no other changes proposed to the existing 941 sq ft(footprint)building. The existing building is about 12 It in height and with the new roof at the peak will be about 20 ft in height. The existing roof is to be removed and the new roof with trusses will be placed on top with siding to be vinyl shake. Site plan for new facade on existing building. Relief requested for setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for the replacement of a flat roof with a peaked roof. The project site is located at 384 Ridge Road on a 0.23 ac parcel in the Moderate Density Residential. The site has approved Use Variance for a commercial business in the MDR zone,Use Variance 77-1992. Section 179-3-040 MDR The new roof requires relief from the side yard where 4.3 ft is proposed and 25 ft is required,then the rear yard where 9.8 ft is proposed and 30 ft is required. SEQR Type II—no further review required; 21 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) A public hearing was advertised and held on October 16,2024. Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-OSO(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. It's essentially putting anew roof on of a different variety than currently exists. 2. Feasible alternatives are not really available. It's a logical solution to the problem. 3. The requested variance is not substantial because all those setbacks already exist. 4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. 5. The alleged difficulty is not really self-created. It's because of the lot configuration. 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; It's going to be a plus for the health, safety and welfare of the community. 7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary,- S. 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. 59-2024 TAMARA SUTPHIN/384 RIDGE LLC, Introduced by James Underwood,who moved for its adoption,seconded by Ronald Kuhl: Duly adopted this 16'Day of October 2024 by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Henkel,Mr. Urrico,Mrs. Palacino,Mr. Kuhl,Mr. Underwood,Mr.Keenan,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Cipperly MR. MC CABE-Congratulations,you have a project. MS. SUTPHIN-Thank you. Have a good evening. MR. MC CABE-So our next application is AV 60-2024,Jennifer&David Luce,91 Rockhurst Road. AREA VARIANCE NO.60-2024 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II JENNIFER&z DAVID LUCE AGENT(S) SUE DAVIS(SD ATELIER ARCHITECTURE) OWNER(S) JENNIFER&z DAVID LUCE ZONING WR LOCATION 91 ROCKHURST RD. APPLICANT PROPOSES ALTERATIONS TO AN EXISTING HOME. THE DECK IS TO BE REMOVED&z REPLACED WITH A 339.19 SQ.FT.DECK AND 107 SQ. FT. STORAGE AREA BENEATH IT. A PORTION OF THE ROF FOR BACK AND FRONT TO CHANGE TO A GABLE ROOFLINE. SITE PLAN FOR NEW HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF SHORELINE AND NEW FLOOR AREA. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR SETBACKS, FLOOR AREA, AND PERMEABILITY. CROSS REF SP 72-2017; AV 41-2002; SP 14- 2002 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING OCTOBER 2024 ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY ALD LOT SIZE 0.22 ACRES TAX MAP NO.227.13-2-37 SECTION 179-3-040 STEFANIE BITTER&SUE DAVIS,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 60-2024,Jennifer & David Luce, Meeting Date: October 16, 2024 "Project Location: 91 Rockhurst Rd. Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes alterations to an existing home. The deck is to be removed&replaced with a 339.19 sq It deck and 107 sq It storage area beneath it.A portion of the roof for back and front to change to a gable roof fine. Site plan for new hard surfacing within 50 ft of shoreline and new floor area. Relief requested for setbacks, floor area, fence location,and permeability. 22 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks,floor area,and permeability for alterations to an existing home. The project is located at 91 Rockhurst Road on a 0.21 ac parcel in the Waterfront Residential zone. Section 179-3-040 The relief requested for the new roofline area is 26 ft from the front where a 30 ft setback is required,then the new roofline as the shoreline side is to be 45 ft 2 inches where a 50 ft setback is required. Relief for the shoreline setback where the deck is to be 36 ft where a 50 ft setback is required(noting the existing deck is currently 36 ft setback),The deck is to be S ft 4 inches from the side property line where a 20 ft setback is to be required. Floor area request where proposed is 2,944 sq ft then existing is 2,537 sq ft and maximum allowed is 2,069.7E sq ft. Fence less than 50 ft from the shoreline. 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 little 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 limited due to the location of the existing home and lot size. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief maybe considered moderate relevant to the code. The front roof setback relief is 4 ft, the rear roof setback relief is 4 ft 10 inches, Deck setback to shoreline relief is 4 ft, deck setback side relief is 11 ft S inches, floor area relief is 574.22 sf more than allowed,noting only 107 sf is new. Existing fence and proposed fence same location just a new fence still within 50 ft of the shore relief requested. 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 applicant proposes alterations to an existing home for new gable roof sections, replacement of an existing deck and storage underneath. The plans show the building elevation view of the existing and proposed. The project includes new shoreline plantings and stormwater for the site." MR. URRICO-And then 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 October 15`h,2024 by a unanimous vote. MS. BITTER-Good evening. Stefanie Bitter here with Sue Davis,the project architect. We are here this evening for the applicants to renovate the current home, obviously increasing the aesthetics from the shoreline, but to also make the lakefront area more functional and accessible for multi generations. In adding the new roofline,obviously that's to improve the aesthetics portion of it,but the plans also include removing and replacing the existing front deck and the storage area that would be incorporated underneath that deck. The new deck is the 339 and change square foot,which is the additional area,and that storage area below is that 107 square feet of the new floor area. So even though that's not livable space, it's just area for storage, since the property is limited in storage with a one car garage,it still counts. As was noted in Staff comments,what the applicants are doing is really using the area that's already improved. They're not increasing the setbacks,neither to the side setbacks or to the shoreline. They're just improving what's there and the area that's already occupied by some type of improvement. I think that the architect who submitted the plans did a really good job highlighting this on the site development data by showing that the setbacks are really remaining the same with the project as it exists and what we're proposing. There is an aerial that if Laura can get to that on the slide,you'll see that across the shoreline there we're maintaining the same shoreline setbacks as the adjacent neighbors. So it's not a further encroachment that's not already there in neighborhood. So when reviewing the balancing test we feel that the benefit to the applicant definitely outweighs any detriment to the community in the project we put forth. No undesirable change. We're increasing the aesthetics,as well as making it a more functional environment. The deck would be within the shoreline,with any modifications that are presented. The relief should be considered minor due to that. It's already an improved area that we're suggesting to modify and renovate, 23 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) and no adverse impacts should be deemed to exist since we are obviously incorporating stormwater controls with the site plan, as well as adding additional plantings to the shoreline. It should not be considered fully self-created since the area is also,is already improved, and we're just trying to modify it. Did you have anything else to add? MS. DAVIS-Hi. Sue Davis,SD Atelier Architecture. I wanted to just pick up on what Stefanie said. The aerial was in your packet that was submitted,but if you look on the survey or what's up here on the site plan,I don't have one of those nice little lasers,but if you see the little blue line,it is indicated that we are not out of character. In fact,this property sits back from some of the adjacent neighbors, sort of the way the shoreline works anyway. I also want to mention that the new cedar fence,we propose to re-locate that out of the shoreline. So we'd just take it off the table. It's something that,you know,we don't need to keep it exactly where it currently is. You see it as a flat sort of map,but please note that there's like kind of rubble, kind of river rock that goes down to the lake right now,which is on the contours, if you have that site plan would be indicated. Again,driving home that the client bought this,wanted to update the exterior. It sort of grew in scope,let's change the windows,let's change the siding,oh maybe I want a vaulted ceiling. So that's going to affect the roofhne, and we wanted to break up that,if you go back to the visual,the 3-D rendering that we put together,it's a very,right now you see it as white. It's not really in character with Adirondack style. The long roof. We were just trying to aesthetically break that up, give a little more interest,hence the gable coming out with the truss. In order to do that gable,however, it has to project out slightly beyond what's currently there to achieve the aesthetics we're going for, and the client has a desire to have a deck that's actually functioning. Right now it's just a landing with a grand set of stairs coming down. We're not actually getting any closer to the lake, anymore than that last step comes out. So trying to be respectful of the existing conditions,it sounds like a lot until you dive into it and realize that there's so many non-conformities already that we're dealing with pre-existing up there. MR. MC CABE-As are many of the properties. MS. DAVIS-Yes,unfortunately that's the case. MR. MC CABE-Do we have any questions of the applicant? MR. HENKEL-It looks like you share a shed with the neighbor. MR. KUHL-Is this property in the Rockhurst HOA? MS. DAVIS-I'm not aware of it myself. I was never told anything about that. I was never told that it is. MR. KUHL-Well I figured that's part of your homeowners,isn't it? Because they have a restriction. MS. DAVIS-No,I've never been told that it's part of any HOA. MR. MC CABE-Other questions? So a public hearing has been advertised. So at this particular time I'm going to open the public hearing and see how many people out there want to comment on this particular project? Do we have anything written,Roy? 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 Jim. MR. UNDERWOOD-I think it's a major improvement from the aesthetic that currently exists,you know, that suburban look to it, and I think the addition 100 square feet of relief needed for the oversize of the project is minimal. It's when we have this storage,it's not a big deal. So I'm in favor of it. MR. MC CABE-Mary? MRS. PALACINO-I'd be in favor of it,too. I think it's a vast improvement over what's there now. MR. MC CABE-Bob? MR.KEENAN-I like the aesthetic improvements and as Jim said I don't think it's much of a stretch for the 100 square feet since it's going to be pretty much existing. MR. MC CABE-Roy? 24 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) MR. URRICO-It's a nice looking project. I'd be in favor of it. MR. MC CABE-Ron? MR. KUHL-I agree. It's a good project. MR. MC CABE John? MR. HENKEL-They're way over the FAR variance and the permeability is terrible, but they'/re not changing much,so I'd be on board. MR. MC CABE-So I mean it's typical of a quarter acre property. Almost all of the over go the floor area ratio,and it's improving the aesthetics of the property,and it's not taking up any more space than it is now. It's just utilizing some of the space in a different manner. Sol,too,support the project. So,Bob,I wonder if you could fashion us up a motion here. MR. KEENAN-Sure. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Jennifer &z David Luce. Applicant proposes alterations to an existing home. The deck is to be removed&replaced with a 339.19 sq ft deck and 107 sq ft storage area beneath it. A portion of the roof for back and front to change to a gable roofline. Site plan for new hard surfacing within 50 ft of shoreline and new floor area. Relief requested for setbacks,floor area,and permeability. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks,floor area,and permeability for alterations to an existing home. The project is located at 91 Rockhurst Road on a 0.21 ac parcel in the Waterfront Residential zone. Section 179-3-040 The relief requested for the new roofline area is 26 ft from the front where a 30 ft setback is required,then the new roofline as the shoreline side is to be 45 ft 2 inches where a 50 ft setback is required. Relief for the shoreline setback where the deck is to be 36 ft where a 50 ft setback is required(noting the existing deck is currently 36 ft setback),The deck is to be S ft 4 inches from the side property line where a 20 ft setback is to be required. Floor area request where proposed is 2,944 sq ft then existing is 2,537 sq ft and maximum allowed is 2,069.7E sq ft. Fence less than 50 ft from the shoreline. SEQR Type II—no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on October 16,2024. Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-OSO(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 feel this is actually an aesthetic improvement to the character of the neighborhood. 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 minor change in the size of the building. 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 only because they want to make improvements to the property. 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,- S. The Board also proposes the following conditions: a) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. 25 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 60-2024 JENNIFER &z DAVID LUCE, Introduced by Robert Keenan, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Ronald Kuhl: Duly adopted this 16'Day of October 2024 by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Henkel,Mr.Keenan,Mr. Underwood,Mrs. Palacino,Mr. Urrico,Mr. Kuhl,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Cipperly MR. MC CABE-Congratulations,you have a project. MS. BITTER-Thank you so much. MS. DAVIS-Thank you. MR. MC CABE-So next week we have a seminar setup. It should take about 15 minutes. MRS. MOORE-Correct. MR. MC CABE-So we're going to ask that if you're interested,show up at 7 o'clock and we're going to have a little talk about cannabis. MR. KUHL-Seven o'clock? MRS. MOORE-Seven o'clock. MR. MC CABE-And then the other thing is, Laura, you were talking about possibly having a second meeting in November? MRS. MOORE-Not at this time,no. MR.MC CABE-All right. So original thought maybe we'd need an extra because we only have one meeting in November and one in December. MRS. MOORE-I'll see if we need,I would probably push it to the first week in December. MR. MC CABE-That's what you were talking about. MRS. MOORE-I will take a look at what we have upcoming and if we need to do that,we'll talk about it next Wednesday. MR. MC CABE-Okay. MR. KUHL-I'll be gone December I"through April IS` MRS. MOORE-Thank you. MR. MC CABE-I'll be gone December 1S`h. So with that said,I make a motion that we adjourn tonight's meeting. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF OCTOBER 16TK, 2024, Introduced by John Henkel who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Keenan: Duly adopted this 16`h day of October,2024,by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Kuhl,Mrs. Palacino,Mr. Henkel,Mr. Urrico,Mr. Underwood,Mr. Keenan,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, 26 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/2024) Michael McCabe,Chairman 27