Staff Notes Packet ZBA Mtg Wed July 20 2016 Staff Notes
ZBA Meeting
Wed . , July 20, 2, 01, 6
Town of Queensbury
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Sign Variance No.: PZ 134-2016
Project Applicant: Lake George Assoc. DXL Men's Apparel
SEERType: Unlisted
Pareel History: BP 2015-41.8 DXL Coni'l. Alt.; SP 9-2015; AV 5-2015; SV 90-1,996; SV
23- 1993; SV 1395 yr 1988; SV 1371 yr. 1988
Meeting Date. July 20, 20116
Description of Proposed Project,
Applicant proposes to replace both sign panels forDX'
' L Mens Apparel. store on the freestanding; sign
located on Route 149 and, on Route 9. The proposed panel sign on Route 149 is to be 24.15 sq. ft. and the
panel sign oin, Route 9 is to be 24.67 sq, ft. The freestanding sign on Route 149 is 5133 sq. ft. and on
Route 9 is 54.93 sq. ft.
The applicant requests the following relief. Relief is requested for size and location of freestanding signs
in the Commercial Intensivemne–Cl,
Section 140 Signs for which permits are re juired—location of signs and size of signs
The applicant proposes a free standing sign, on Route 149 maintaining the setback at 10 it: 7 in and
proposing an overall sign of 51.33 sq ft and then a free standing sign on Route 9 maintaining the setback.
of 0 it and overall sign of 54.93 sq ft sign where a 15ft setback is required and a 45 sq ft maximum sign
is allowed.
Criteria for considering a Sign Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Lay.
In malcing a determination, the board shall consider:
L Whetbe�r 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 sign variance. Minimal impacts
to the neighborhood, may be anticipated.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by sone method, kasible for the
applicant to pursue, other than a sign variance, Feasible alternatives may be consideted to be limited
for setbacks due to the lot configuration, the current parking area, and existing budding,location. "I'he size
of the sign may be reduced as a feasible alternative to be compliant with 'dire code.
3. Whether-therequested sign variance is substaratial. The relief re:quested may be considered
substantial relevant to the code. The Route 9 sign irlief is proposed 633 sq ft in excess, for,size and 10.42
ft for setback. The Route 149 sign refief proposed is 9»93 sq ft in excess for size and 15 ft .(,br setba,ck.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on tile physical or
environmental, conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project as proposed may have a
minimal impact within the district. The applicant proposes to maintain the existing ftee standing signs in
their current locations.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was, self-created. The difficulty may be consideird self-crcated,
Staff Com
The applicant proposes to maintain a free standing sign on Route 149 and Route 9 maintaining the setback
and size. The plans show the signage panels to be installed and the entire sign With all tenants,. The
signage on 149 has been installed without approvals.
Zoning Board of Appeals
Com mu nity Development DepartrMent Staff Notes
Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Rtsolation
Town cif Queensbury 742 Ba:y Road Queensbury, NY' 12804 (518) 761-8238
'Ca uin C',jr(L"ec"illsbary
Sign Variance Resolution To. Approve/Disapprove
Applicant Name; Lake George Assoc. le 1.Mem Apparel
File Number: P7-0134-2016
Location., 1498 State Route 9
Tax Map,Number- 288.t2,1-15
Z8A Meeting Date- Wednesday, July 2q,,201
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Lake,Gcorgj Assoc. D Melts
Aj2pa rel for a vari ance from Cha pter 140 of the Sign.Code of TheTown of Queensbury. A ppi ica nt proposes to replace
both sign panels for D Mens Apparel store on 'the freestanding,sign located on Route 149 and on Route 9.The
proposed panel sign,on Route 1.49 is to be 24.15 sq,. ft.and the panel:s,igit on Route 9 is to be 24.67 sq. ft. The
freestanding sign on Route 149 Is 51.33 sq., ft—and on, Route 9,is 54.93 sq®ft. Relief Is requested for size and location of
freestanding signs.
SEQR Type: Unlisted lResolution /Action Required for SEQRj
Motion regarding Sign Variance No.PZ-0134-2016 Lake George Assoc. DXL Mens Apparel
based upon the Information and the analysis of the above supporting documentation provided by the applicant,this
Board finds that this will not resuIt in any significant adverse envirornMental impact. So we give it a Negative
Declaration, Introduced by ...... I.,.,. ....1 wbo moved for its adoption,seconded by s.
Duly adopted this by the following vote:
AYES'
N S,
A public hearing was advertised and held on Viedne,,Aqy,, May 25,2016 and Wednesday,July 20, 2016
Upon rev lew of the application n�iater[a Is, inforinati on suppi ied during the public hearing, and,upon consideration of the criteria
specified in Section I79-14-080(A)of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after discussion
and deliberation, we find as follows,-
1. Will an undesirable change be produced in the character of the neighborhood or will a,detriment to the nearby properties
be created by the granting of the requested sign variance? INSERT RESPONSE
2. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method,f"as ible for the applicant to pursue, other than all
sign variance? INSERT RESPONSE
3. Is the requested sign variance substantial.? INSERT RESPONSE
4. Will,the proposed sign varianceliave an,adverse impact on the physical or environmejrtal conditiows in the nvighborhood
or district? INSERT RESPONSE
51. Is the alleged difficulty self-created? INSERT RESPONSE
6. 1n addition the Soard finds that the benefit to tho applicant from granting the requested variance would outwe i! h I wvauld
the resulting detriment'to the health,safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community;
'7, The Board also finds that tho variance roqaoa under consideration is,the minimurn necessary;
8 wsed on the above [Ind in Ws I inio ke ri M OT)ON TO A P 13ROV E I DENY Sign Vo ri a nev No,, FZ-0 134-2016 LH ke George
Assoc. DXL Mens ApParel, Introduced by who moved for its adoption,seconded by
As per the resolution prepared lay staff with the Ulowing.
A. <inse rt cond i tio ns/corn me nts>',
B. The variance approval is valid for one (1)year from the date of approval; you may request an extension ref approval before;
the one(1)year dine frame expires;
C. If the property is located within the:Adirondack Park,the approved Variance is subject to review by the Adirondack Park
Agency(APA). Tile applicalit is cautioned against taking any action until the APA's review is completed,
D. F'inal approved Plans in Compliance with an approved variance most be subilairted to the Community Developi-nent
DV,artment before any f1jr-ther review by the,Zonin,g,A,di-nin,istratoi, or Building&codes personnel'
F., Sabsvqaont issuamxl of further permits, iTicluding sign,permits are dependent on receipt or those fiTial Planus;
F, 'Upon approval of the applioation,TOVieW and apprOVal Of rival plan.5 by the Coinmonity Dovolopment Departrnont the
applicant can apply for asigp. permit unless the proposed project requires review, approval,or permit from the Town
Planning Board ancUor the Adirolidack'Park;Agemy, Lake Goorgo Park Corninissi" or other State agency or department,
Duly adopted this 2 "'day of July 2016, by the followiog vote-,
AYES:
NOES:�
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
CommunHy Development Qepartmenf Staff 'Notes
Area Variance No.. PZ 184-2016
Project Applicant- Ross, Dubarry, Airport Manager Warren County
Project Location: 443 Queensbury Avenue (Airport)
Parcel History: SB Prelim PZ-185-2016; SD Final PZ-186-2016; SP 5,6-90, SP 52-0 ,600 qSt.
self-storage, SP 2-1.0 1,500 sq.ft office 10,000 sq. ft. repossession storage,
SP 55-14 land clearing for marketing
SEQR,Type. Type 11
Meeting Date. July 20, 2016,
Description of Proposed
Applicant proposes to subdivide a 25.45 were parcel into 2 lots; 25.36 acres and 0.09 acres. Prqj�ect is part of
Warren County Airport runway ptoject activities, Subdivision—Planning Board review for a two lot subdivison.
Relief 1"'uired.
The applicant requests the following relief- Relief requested from minimum lot size requirements for the
Commercial Light Industrial zoning district -CLI.
Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts dimensional re uireinents
The CLI zone mpAres a minirnum of"one acre per lot. The Proposed subdivision creates a lot at 0.09 ac
Criteria, for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of"Town Law:
j
In making a determination,the board shall consider:
1. Whether an undesinible change will be Produced in the chRracter of the i1eighborhood or a detriment to
nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area vnriRncc. Minor impacts to the neighborhood 1ray
be anticipated.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to
pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered limited due to the existing parcel
tonfiguration and the, requirements for the airport clear zone. "I'lie parcel is part of land in Kingsbury under the Sallie
owner and, is not proposed for any development at this time.
3. Whether the requested area, varimice is substantial. The relief re�quested may be considered substantial relevant
to the,code. "the relief requested is 0.91 ac..
4. Whether the proposed variance will have Ri'i adverse effect or impact on the physical or envirolimental
conditions in the neighborhood or district. "flue project may be considered to have miniinal. impact on the physical,
or the,environmental conditions of the area.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-creRted. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Istaff conAt="ents.,
The subdivision plan shows the land between Queensbury and Kingsbury that is involved with the Airport
Clearance zone activities. The applicant has, indicated same of the lots are to beretained 'by owners or conveyed
to the County.
Warren County Planning Department Jutl(i-03
Project Review and Referral Form
Reviewed by Departnlent on Jiffy 11, 2016
Pr Deet Name- Floyd Bennett Memorial Airport
Owner: Warren County
ID Number: OSY-16-AV-184
County PrqJeCt#' JU116-03
Current.Zoning- CU
Comillunity: Queensbury
Project Description.-
Applicant proposas,a 2-lot subdivision of a 25.45 acre, parcel. New lots will be 25.36 acres and 0.09 acres, Project is part
of Warren County Airport runway project activities. Relief requested from minimum lot size requirements for the CLI
zoning district
Site Location
443 Queensbury Ave -Ward 2
Floyd Bennett Memorial Airport
Tax Map Nurnber(s)-
297.116-1-1-1
Staff Notes:
The issues; here appear to be of a local nature involving local issues without any significant impacts
�on County properties or resources. Staff recommends no county impact based on the information
submitledUbsp, according to the suggested review criteria of NYS General Municipal Law Section,239 applied to
tha , proposed project., <br 1>
Local actions to date (if tiny.)
County Planning Department:
NCI
Local Action./Final Disposition:
Warren County Planning Department Date Signed 1,0cal Official Date Signed
11,CAU REUMN 1"HIS PORNITO THR W&RREN COU'N,ry PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITHIN 10 DAYS OF FINAL ACTION
Zoning Board of.A.Ppegals— Record of Resolution
Town f Queensbuty 742, Bay Road QLieensbui-y,NY 12804 (519) 761-8238
lbwj)
Area Va ria nee Resol utio n Toa Approve i Disapprove
Applicant Name; Ross Dubarry, Airport Manager—Warren County
Fi le N u m lber-. P7-0184-2016
Location: 443 QtteenSbUry Avenue(Floyd Bennett Merriorial Airpoil)
Ta x M a p Number. 2'97.11 -1-1,1 and 297.20-1-
BA Meeting Date: Wi~dncsday, July 20,2016
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Qooensbury has received an application ftom Ross Dubarry, Airport Mranagcr
Warrell'Courity. Applie-ont proposes to subdivide a 25.45 acre parcel into 2 lots; 25.36 acres and 0.09 acres. Project is part of
Warren Couoty Airport ruriwiq project activities. Relief requested from infiffinurn lot size requirements for the CLI zoning
difstrict,
SEQR Type:11—no fiti-cher rOVireW required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday,July 20, 2016;
Upoil review of the application inat:erials,,information supplied during,the public hearing, and Upon of the criteria
specified in Section 179-14-080(A)of the Queen sbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law rind after discussion and
deliberation,we find as follows:
PF'RT11F STAFF
1, There
,n
qt an undesirable change in tile character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties,becaus
Feasible alternatives Mr
ry mmmm and.have been considered by the Boaid, are reasonable-and have been included to minintize
the rV'LLLgg OR are
s
permm
3. The requested variance b ZJ5Cell
.gqt substantial b, usc
4. There is I is not an adverse irnpact ori the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district?
5. The alleged difficult y jissriotsclf-creatcd,��,,,
6. In addition [lie Board finds that the benefit to the applicant Roan granting the requested variance woLild outNyeigh_(approyalL/
would be outweLyhe4 by_fdg11ipj)the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community,
7. 7,lie Board also Ends that the variance request under comidoration is the minimum,necessary;
The Board also proposes the following condiflons:!
a)
b)
c) Adherence to the iterris outlhied in thofollow-up letter sent:with this 17esolution.
E3 'J _NJ.q. EA5.()yF
Fj, -Q S,I M KE
A A MOTION TO APPROVE I DENY AREA VARIANCE PZ-01.84-2016, Ross,
Dobarry, AiTort M"agor Warren County,introduced by_,,who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 20"' day of July,20 1 f by the following vote:
AYES
NOES.
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Developmeni Department Siaff Notes
Area Variance No.: PZ 175-2016
Project Applicant: Omall FaUtily Limited Partnership
Project Location: 102 Quaker Road
Parcel History. SV PZ-01.77-2016; S,.P Mod PZ,174-2016; SP 20-2014; SP 39-2013
$EER Type-, Type 11
Meeting Date: July 20, 2016
IlDescription of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes, construction of a new 231 sq. ft. primary entryway addition to the existing retail / office
building. The new entryway will be 21 feet 8 inches in height and 8 feet in width. Planning Board: Site Plan
Review ,for expansion of the building and for the associated site improvements.
Relief Rc2
The applicant requests the following relief. Relief requested from front property line setback of the Commercial
Intensive zone -CL
Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts dimensional requirements
The, Commercial Intensive zone requires a 75 ft front setback. The new entry way area is proposed to be 44,69 ft
at the east corner and 4335 ft at the west corner from the front property line:.
Criteria forr.consid eri ni an Area Varian ce according to,Cha Ater 267 of Tow it Lnd
In making a determination, the board shall consider-,
I. 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.
2. Whether the, benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to 'pursue" other than an area variance, Feasible alternatives may be considered limited due to
the location of the existing building
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief"requested may be: considered. minor to
moderate relevant to the code. The relief requested 30.31. ft on the east comer and 31 Z on the west corner.
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 may be considered to have
minimal impact on the physical, or the environmerttal conditions of the area.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Staff cora me
�1 I t jss�
"I'he applicant proposes a modification to an approved site plan to renovate the front facade to create a new
entryway to the building. The entry way is to be 33 ft in height with a%vidth of7 ft from the main building at the
columns and 8ft width.-at the top. The new entry way is to be consistent with the existing masonry building.
The building is arranged for three tenants and the new entryway will be at the Tenant One space.
Warren County Planning Department
Pr(kiect Review and Referral Form
Reviewed by Department on July 11, 2016
Project Name: Omall Family Limited Partnership
Owner: Ornall Family Limited Partnership
ID Number- OBS'-16-AV-,175
County Project#: JU11 6-04
Current Zoning: C1
Corn=sdty, Queenslury
Project Description:
Applicant proposes Qonstruction of anew 231 sq, ft. primary entryway addition to the existing retailtoffice building.,The
new entryway will be 21 feet a inches in height and 8 feet In width® Planning Board. Site Plan Review,for expansion of the
buildlilng and for the associated site improvements- Relief requested from property line setbacks,
Site;Location.
102 Quaker Rd-Ward 2
Tax Map Number(s):
30Z7-1-13
Staff Notes:
The issues here appear to be of a local nature involving local issues without any significant impeol's
on  NG,ounty properties or resouroes, -, Staff recommends no county, impact based on the information
subrni,tted ai=rding to the suggested review criteria of NYS General Municipal Law Section 239 applied to
the proposed projoGt. <br/>
Local actions to date(if any):
County Planning Department:
N!Cl
Local Action:/rAnal Disposition:
Z4�L'�o
Warren County Planning Department Date Signed Local Of Date Signed
AXASE RZTURN THFS FORM TO THE WARREN COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITIUN l0 DAYS OF FINSL ACTION
Zoning Board of Appeals —Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12,804 (518) 761-8238
Area Variance Resolution Tor Approve I Disapprove
A ppi ica nt Na in e: Ginall Family Lin iced partnership
File Number: PZ-0175-2046
Location: 102 Quaker Road
Tax Map Number: 302.7-1-13
ZBA Meeting Date; Wednesday, July 2 0,20,1 6
The Z*nirig, Board of Appeals of the Town of Queonsbury has received an app[jeati*n ftom Omall Family, Limited Partnership.
Applicant proposes construction of a new 131 sq. ft. priniary entryway addition;to the existing retail i office building. The new
entryway will be 11 feet 8 inches in height and 8 feet in width. Planning Board: Site Plan Review for expansion of (lie
building and for the associated site improve in ents. Relief requested from property line setbacks.
S EQR Type 1'l—no I'Lirdier reviewrequired;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, July 20, 016,
Upon review of the application materials, infortnation supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria
specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury "]'own Code and Chapter 267 ofNYS Town Law and after discussion and
deliberation,we find as follows.
111"RA1,11E DRAFTIPROVIDED BY S]"AlFF
1. There is I is t ot an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because
2. Feasible alternatives Ar± and have been considemd by the Board, ko uji n i in ize
flIg Lqtjo OR�pfgajp N..._m.
..........................
3- The requested'variance j,& mantial bpoil, g..........
,Mmi,bq .............
4. There is I is not an ad-verse impact on the physical or environ rental conditions in the neighborhood or district?
5. The alleged difficulty is,) is not self-created because
6. In addition the Board finds, that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would gLuitwcjgL(,a,.r
would be:ourwgighed by(&njal)the resulting detriment to the health,safety and,welfare of the neighborhood or comm.wiky;
7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the mininitim necessary,
8. The Board also proposes the foriloWing conditions:
a)
b)
6) Adherence to the items,outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution,-
!LA$jD ON-1`14E ASOV
&mkTtO _75:zm, ()Mail
Family Limited Partnership, Introduced by who moved for its adoption, soconded by
Duly adopted this 2 'day of July,2016by the following vote:
AY 2S-
NOP_S:
Town, of Queens,buiry
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Sign Variance No- PZ i177-2016
Project Applicant: }mall Family Limited Partnership
SEQR Type. Unlisted
Pamel Histo)-y- AV PZ-0175-2016; SP Mod PZ-174-2016; SP 20-2014; SP39-2013
Meeting Date: July 20, 016
Description of Propose
Applicant proposes installation of an additional wall sign for a tenant in the business plaza. The project
it updating all signage. The plaza is to have three tenants where orke tenant proposes two will.
signs; one on the north side on new entry at 100 sq. ft, and one on the east side at no greater than 4 5 sq. A,
Refief Requir
The applicant requests the following relief-. .elief requested from number of allowable wall signs per
tenant in a business plaza in the Commercial Intensive vkne-CI.
Section 140 SjZVLs for Which permiLs&M re_qu ed—location of signs and size of si s
The appfioant proposes an additional wall sign for Tenant One. In a business complex a tenant is only
allowed one wall sign.
Criteria for considering a Sign '`variance according to Chapter 267 of Town.Law:
In making a determination, the board shall consider:
Y. Whether an, undesirable ehange'will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment.to
nearby properties will be created by the granting of this sign variance. Minimal impacts to the "eigliborhood
may be anticipated.
2.Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to
pursue, uthei- than a sign variance. Feasible alternatives,maybe limited as the project includes faqade upgrades
fora new entry way where Tenant One i8 proposed to have two entrances. The,fad ade upgrade is for the north face
that Nvould include signage for Tenant One then a new sign facade is proposed for Tenant One and Tenant Two on
the east face where a majority of the parking is, located.
3.Whether the req u ested sign variance is substa ntial. The relief requested may be considered so bstanti at
relevant to the code:. The relief requested is for a business Qornplex tenant to have two suns where only one is
allowed.
4. Whethet- the proposed varianee will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental
conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project as Proposed inay have a minimal impact within the
districL
5.Wbether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
The applicant proposes a modification to an approved site plan to renovate the front fagade to create a new,
entryway to the building. The plans sbow the loo ation of the north °ace and east f6ce florTenant One:
signage to be Floor taster Carpet One., The project also includes a new freestanding sign to be in the
planter box listing the three tenants and to be internally illuminated.
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Warren County Planning Department
Project Review said Referral Form
Reviewed by Departmeiit on JWy 11, 2016
Project Name: Ornal] Family Limited Partnership
Owner- 0mail Family Limited Partnership
�'ID Number: QBY-16-Sfid'-177
County Project#: Ju116-05
Current Zoning: cl
Community: Queensbury
Project Description:
Applicant proposes installation of an additional wall sign for a tenant in the busi'ne8s plaza,. The project includes updating
all signage. The plaza is to have three tenants where one tenant proposes two wall signs; one on the north side on new
e ntry at 100 sq. It., and one on the east side at no greater than 45 sq;.ft. IRaliof requested from number of allowable wall[
signs per tenant in a business plaza
,Site Locadon:
102 Quaker Rd-Ward 2
Tax map Number(s):
302.7-1-13
Staff Notes:
The issues here appear to be of a local nature involving local issues without any significant impacts
on&n,bsp,, Coun1y properties or resourcas,Ubsp:; Staff recommends no courity impact based on the information
submitted a=ording to the suggested review criteria of NYS General Municipal Law Seation 239 applied to
the proposed project. br I>
JAW actions to date (if any)-
County Planning Department:
Ncl
Local Action./Final Disposition:
Warren County,Planning Department Date Signed Local Mtiat Date Signed
PLEASE,RETURN TBIS FORIV1 TO THE WARREN COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITEIN 10 DAYS OF FIN.AL ACTION
Zoni ng Boa rd of Ap peals— Record of Resol istion
Town of Queansbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
T(mn
Sign,Variance Resolution To: Approve/Disapprove
Applicant Name: Ornall Family Limited Partnership,
File Number: PZ-0177-2016
Location: 102 Quaker Road
Tax Map Number. 302.7-1-13
ZBA Meeting Date: Wednesday, Aily 20,2016
The Zxining Board of ppeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Ornail Family Limited
PArtRer'Ship (OF a VaTiaMQ (FOM Chapter 140 of the Sign Code of The Town of Quoensbury. Applicant proposes installation
of an,additional wall,sign for a,tenant in the biisiness plaza. The project includes updating all signage. The plaza is to
have three tenants where one tenant proposes two wall sign,s; one on the north side on new entry at 100 sq. ft.,and,one:
on,the cost side at no greater than 45 sq. ft. Relief requested from number of allowable wall signs per tenant in a
business plaza.
SEQR Type, Unlisted I Resolution.I Action Roq0ted for 8EQIR1
Motion regarding Sign Variance PZ-0177-2016 Ornall Family Limited Partnership based upon the information and the
analysis of the above supporting documentation provided by the applicant,this Board finds thak this will not result in
any significant adverse environmental impact., go we give it a Negative Declaration, Introduced by
WbOL moved for its Adoption, seconded by,
Duly adopted 20"'day of July,2016,by the following vote.
AYES,:
NOES:
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday,Jifly 20,2016;
Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing,and upon consideration of the criteria
specified in Section 179-14-0S0(A)of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NYS Town, Law and after discussion
and delibcrafion, we,find as follows:
1. Will an undesirable change.be produced in the character of the neighborhood or will a detrimont to die nearby properties
Tie created by the grantingof the requested sign variance? INSFRT'RESPONSF
2. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved ley some method, foasibie for the applicant to pursue,other than an
sign veriaticc? INSERT RESPONSE
3, Is tho reqoestod sign variancesubstantial? INSERT RESPONSE
4, Will the:proposed sign variance Kavo an advoFso impact on the physical,or environmental conditions in the neighborhood
ordistrict? INSEWl' RESPONSE
5. is the alleged difficulty self-created? INSERT RESPONSE
6- In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant frons granting the requested variance would outweigh/wotild
be outweigliLd,bof the safety and welfare, neighborhood or community,
.y,the resulting detriment to the health,
7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consid eration is the in i n iinuin necessary,
Based on the above findings I make a MOTIONTO APPROVE I DEN"Y'Sign Variance PZ-0177-2016,Oniall Fankily
Limited Partnership, Introduced by. who moved for its adeption, seconded by_.-.
As peer the rosolotion,proparod by staff with the following:
A, <JnsKELgq!WJtions I
B. The variance approval is va[id for one(1)year ftom the date ofapproval;you may mluest an oxtonsion of approval before
the one (1)year time frame expires;
C. if the proporty is located within the ,din ondaok Park,the approved variance: j�mihjoot to review by the Adirondack Park
Agency(APA), The appli0ont is eautioned against taking any aetion until tho APA's review is eomplacd,
D. Final approved plans in comphiao" with all appToved variwice i-num he stibmitted to the:Community Development
Department before any further rovi-ow by the Z*ning,Administrator or Building&codes personnel'
E. Subsequent issuance of further permits, including sign permits are dependent oil receipt of these final plans-,
F. Upon approval of the;application, review and approval of final plans by the Coinniunity Development Department the
applicant can apply for a sign permit unless the proposed project requires review,approval, or permit ftorn the Town
Planning Board and/or the Adirondack Park Agency, Lake George Park Commission or other State agency or drCpartIlICIA,
Duly adopted this 2W" day of July, 2016 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board, of Appeals
Community Development i trlment Staff Notes
AreaVariance No.: PZ 178-2016
Project Applicant:: Celleo Partnership d1b/a Verizon Wireless
Project L"ation.- City of Glens Falls Water'Tank (AviationMail Read)
Parcel History- SP M-0171-2016; Bp 6503 yr. 190 chlorine room
SEQR Type: Type 11
Meeting Date, July 20, 2016
De,s, clietion of Propos
Applicant proposes construction of an, I I . 6 in,, by 16 ft equipment building for antennae colloc,ation project
on the City of Glens Falls rater Tank. Project includes, installation of 12 panel. ant nn as and sitework.
Planning Board: Site Plan Review for construction of the telecommunications system, support buildings, and
site improvements.
liefRequucel
u
The applicant requests the following ielief- Relief requested from minirnuni property line setbacks for the
Parkland (P1 -42) zoning district.
Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts dimensional Muhements,
The Park]and zone requi res a 100 ft front setback, The new equipment shelter is proposed, to be 2 8 ft fi-om the
front property line.,
Criteria for considering,an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of To
In malcing a determination, the board shall consider-
1. 'Whether an undesintb1c, change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to
nearhy properties will bt created by the granting of this area variance., Minor impact�to the neighborhood. may
be anticipated.
2. 'Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by same method, feasible for theapplicant to
pursue, other than an area. variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered limited due to the existing parcel
configuration and the locationof the existing Water Tanks.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may becon sidered substantial relevant
to the,code. The relief requested is 72 ft.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact our the physical or environinental
c(3nditions in the neighborhood or district. The project may be considered to have minimal impact on the physilcal
or the environmental conditions of the area.
5. Whether the iffleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Lsteff COMMentsi.
The equipment shelter is to be 184 +/- sq ft and 12 ft: in height, The shelter is an open Amcture to provide coverage,of
the equipment for the operations of the antennas to be located on the tan k.. The existing northern water tank at 122.6 ft
high and will be utilized, to place the 12 panel antennas and associated equipment for the operations of Verizon cell
service. The plans show the antennas wi I I be located at 10 8 ft height of the tan L The su bin i5s ion i tic I tides elevations of
the quipment shelter and the placement of the antennas,on the water tank.
Warren County Planning Department
Project Review and Referral Forin
Reviewedby Departnwnt on July 11, 2016
Project Name- Cellco Partnership dtaa'Verizon Wireless
Owner. City of Glens Falls,
ID Number: Q8Y-1 6-AV-1 78
County ProjecM JU116-06
Current Zoning- PR-42A
cornninnity: Queensbury
Project Description:
Applicaini proposes construction of an 11 ft. 6,in. by 16 ft. equipment building for antennae collocation project on the City
of Glens Falls'Water'T'ank. Project includes installation of 12 panel antennas and silework. Planning
Board:&nt�sp;SiteU bsp;P[an Review for the,construction of the telecommunicationssystern, support buildings and site
[m proveme nts Relief requested from, m I nimu m property I I ne setbacks for the Parkland (PA-42) zoning district
Site Location;
City of Glens Falls Water Tank
Aviation Mall Rd- Ward 2
Tax Map Nurnber(s),!
302,9-1-43
Staff Notes:
The issues here appear to be of a local nature involving local issues without any significant impacts
,,on ,, County properties or resources. , Staff recommends,no county impact based on the information
submitledUbsp, according to the suggested review criteria of NYS General Municipal, Law Section 239 applied to
the , proposed project. <br I>
Locall attions to date(if any);
County Planning Department,
NCI
Locall.Actions Final.Dispositiom
Warren County.planning Departme�nt Date Signed Local Official Date Signed
I'LEASY RETURN THIS FORMTO THE WARREN COUNfY MANNING DEPARTMENT WITHIN 10 DAYS OF FINAL ACTION
Zoning Board of Appealls—Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Say Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (.518) 71-8238
of(LIALais
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve) DIsapprove
Applicant Nante: Ce:llco Ptutnership d/ba Verizon Wireless
File Number. PZD[7'8-20'1,6
Location: City of Glens Falls Water-Tank(Aviatian Mall, Road)
Tax Mop Number-. 302,9-1-43
ZBAMeeting Date-. Wednesday, July 20,2016
The Zoning Board of Appoals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application florn, Cefto Partnersbip d/b/a Verizon
Wireless, ApplicaRt proposes construction of an 11 ft. 6 in. by 16 ft. equipment building for antennae collocation project on
the City of Glens Falls Water Tank. Project includes installation of 12 panel antennas and sitework. Planning Board: Site
Plan Review for construction of the telecommunications system, support buildings, and she improvements. Relief requested
from minimum property line setbacks for the Park.land (PR-42),zoning district.
SEQR Type 11—no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and field on, Wednesday,July 20, 2016:;
Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria
specified in Section 179-1 1-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NY'S Town Law and after discussion and
deliberation, we find as,follows:
PER THE, DR A,FT I I,')ED 1,13Y STAFF
I. Therc b
an undel�,ira le change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nea,rby properties because,
�2- Feasible alternatives"are and have beu�n considor.W by the Board,
there LLest OR.gre uaaLil
3, 1"he requested variance Is/ Is not,substantial hegau$*1
4There Is/is not an adverse impact on the physical or env Irontnental conditions i n the neighborhood or,district's
5. The alleged difficulty is/is not self-created because
6. In addition the Board. finds that the benefit: to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh. (ggMy,4f),j
would be outwei ghed by (den ial)the resulting detriment to the health, safety and.welfare of the neighborhood®rc�mm UTI ity;
7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the rnIniniuni necessary;
8. The Board also proposes the following conditions:
a)
b),
c) Adherence to the iterns outlined in.the follow-up letter sent with this resolution.
BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MQTMi�lRE K
�PRQ)L DENY algia VA IANQ2
Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless, Introduced by who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 20"'day of July 2016 by the following vote:
AYES::
NOES::
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
AreaVariance No.: PZ 187-2016
Project Applicant: Thn Barber& Carrie I nglee
Project Location. 35 48 Inglec Mountain Road
Parcel History- SB Mod PZ-183-206 of pi*eVious file SH, 115-20,02 to create 2-lots; SPPZ-1.82-2016;
AV 29-2013 pool; BP 2003-680 SIZD; RC 289-2016 att. Garage (1,800 sq. ft.);
RP 2002-015; BP 2010-075 S
SEER Type: Type 11
Meeting Date: July 20, 2016
I'Desuiption of Proposed Fro jest
Applicant proposes a subdivision modification involving a lot line adjustment between.lots, 3 and 2 of
Subdivision No. 15-2002 Jeffery Inglee. Lot 2 (300.4-40.2)(Sankey) existing 13.95 acres increased to 18.,71
acres and Lot 3 (300.-1-40.3) existing 1,2.23 acres to be decreased to 7.47 acres, Planning Board: S ubdi vision
review is required for the proposed lot changes within Planning Board approved subdivision.
=Reljef
The applicant requests the following reliel% Relief requested for no road ftontage and lot less than 10 acres for
property in the Land, Conservation Ten acre,-LC-10 and Plural Residential five acre —RR-5.
S ectio�n '179-3-040 establishment of districts dimensi onal requirement
The Land C onserva,ti on Zone requires es 10 acres per parcel. The new proposed parcel is to be 7.47 ac
Section 1,79-4-050 Frontage requirements
Parcels, are to have 50 ft of physical road frontage. The new proposed lot wvill have 0 ft of road frontage.
Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of
In making a determination, the board shall consider.
I. Whether an undesirable change will be: produced in the character of the neigbborhood or a detriment
to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor impacts to the
neighborhood may be anticipated.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method,, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, otber than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered limited due to
the existing parcel configuration and the applicant's intent to resolve outstanding neighboring access items,
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial., The relief requested maybe considered moderate
relevant to the code. The: relief requested, is 2.53 ac for lot size and 50 ft for physical road frontage,. The
modification addresses neighboring concerns with access, to and frog, property that is within Lake Luzerne
though lot 3 and easements on property in Queensbury.,
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical o)-
envirortmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project may be considered to have
minimal impact on the physical or the environmental conditions of the area.
S. 'Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Staff comments:
'The applicant's proposal for a subdivision modification to address neighbor concerns with access and casements
created a parcel less than the 10 ac for the LC I OA zone. The plan. provided shows the re w lot arrangement
along with the access easements, where the undersized parcel is associated with other property in Lake Lu erre
under the same ownership. The proposal will continue to allow access to Lot 3 over Lot 2 and Lot 1 through
easements that are noted in the: submission. The project is also part ofthe existing access improvements that are
submitted, for Site Plan review where the Town Code compliance officer noted the road improvernents violated
the site plan and subdivision regulations and the submission for,subdivision modification., area variance, and site
plan addresses,those items.
Zoning Boar-a' of Appeals
Community Development Depariment Staff Notes
Warren County Planiung Department Jul16-07
Project Review and Referral Form
Reviewed, by Departnient on July 11., 2016
Project Natne- Tim Barber & Carrie Inglee
Owner: Tim Barber & Carrie Inglee
ID Number- OBY-16-AV-1:87
County Project#: JuI16-07
Current Zoning: Rn-5A and LC-10A
com'snurifty, Queensbury
Project Descriptiott:
ApplIcant,proposes a s ubd ivisi,on modification involving a lot I i no adjustment between lots 3 and 2 of S Ubd ivision No. 1,5-
20012 Jeffery Inglee, Lot 2 ( 00-1-a40. )( ankey) existing 13.95 acres increased to 18,.71 acres and lot 3 (30th-1® 10.3)
existing 12.23 acres to be decreased to 7.47 acres Planning Board: Su bd Ivision review is required,for the proposed! lot
changes within a P Ian ni ng Board approved subd i'vision. Relief requested for no read frontage and lot less than 10 acres
Site Loeation:
35,& 48 Inglee Mountain Rd-Ward 4
Tax Nlap Nuniber{r,)-
300100-1-
40.2-,300.00-1-40.3
Staff Notes:
The ilssues,here appear to be of a local nature involving local issues without any signIficant Impacts
on ,County proporties or resourcesAnbsp,, Staff recommends no county impact based on the information
subm,itled according to the suggested review criteria of NY$ General Municipal Law Section applied to
the proposed project. <bt 1>
Local actions to date(jf'any):
County Manning Department.
NGI
Local Acdom/F inal.DlspGsition:
Warren County Planning Department Date Signed, Local Of Date Signed
I'MASP RMAN TIUS FORM TO THE WA REEEN COUNTVAILANNING DE PARTMENT WITIHN 10 DAYS OF FINAL ACTION
Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolutimi
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queeiisbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve I Disapprove
Applicant Name: Tim Barber and Carrie IIIlee
File Number: PZ-0187-2'016
Location; 35&48 IR lee Mountain Road
Tax Map Number-, 300,00-1-402,300.00-1-40.3
ZBA Meeting Date, WedneWay, July 20,2016
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensb�ury has received an application from Tint Barber and C,orrie Ing
p glee.
Applicant proposes asubdivision Tnoilification involving a lot line adjustment between lots 3 and 2 of Subdivision No. 15-2002
Jeffery In ;lee. Lot 2 (300.-140.2)(Sankey) existing 13.95 acres increased to 18.71 acres and Lot 3 (300.4-40.3) existing 12.23
acres to be: decreased to 7.47 acres. Planning Board; Subdivision review is required for the proposed lot Olanges Within as
Planning Board approved subdivision. Relief requested for no road frontage and lot less than 10 acres.
SEER Type 11—no further review required;
A public:hearing was adVeTtirsed andheld.011 Wednesday,July 20.,2016;
Upon review of the application inaterials, informatioii supplied during the public hearing, and upon corisideration ofthe criteria
specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NY Town Law and after discussion and
deliberation, we find as follows:
PER'.1"HE, DRAFI'l."ROVIDED BN STA NT
1, There an, undesirable change in the Cl)aTRQtQF of the noighboehood nor a detriment to ne:arby properties because
�2. Peas ib le alternatives,are have been considered l y the Board, 10mirlhRi?.9
(lie request OR are not possible.
3. The requested variance Is/ is not substantial because
4, There is i is not an adverse Impact on the physical or environmental conditions III the neighborhood or district?
S. The alleged difficulty is/is not self-created because
6. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant, frosts granting the requested variance would outwelg!iA4p
Would be outweighed by (denial)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 minirnurn necessary;
8. The Board also proposes the following conditions:
a)
b)
c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution.,
BASED T14E ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE PZ-Ql97-2Q10 Tim
Barber and Carrie Islee Introduced by , who moved for its adoption,seconded by
I
Duly adopted this 20' day of July 2016 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES: