SV 37-2015 Church of the King Approval Resolution July 22, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
Town of Queensbury
RESOLUTION TO: Approve Sign Variance No. 37-2015,
Church of the King, Inc.
681 Bay Road,
intersection of Evergreen Lane and Bay Road
at Cedars Senior Living Community, Tax Map No. 289.19-1-16
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Church of the
King, Inc. for a variance from Chapter 140 of the Sign Code of The Town of Queensbury. Applicant
proposes construction of a new retaining wall between Evergreen Lane and Church of the King for
installation of 12 sq.ft. sign on the wall for the Cedars Senior Living Community. Relief requested from
minimum front and side yard setback requirements for signs. In addition, relief is requested from
maximum number of allowable signs on the property.
SEQR Type: Unlisted;
Motion regarding Sign Variance No. 37-2015, Church of the King, Inc. based upon the information
provided by the applicant and the supporting documentation,this Board finds that this will not result in
any significant adverse environmental impact. So we give it a Negative Declaration, Introduced by
Richard Garrand who moved for its adoption, seconded by John Henkel:
Duly adopted this 22nd day of July, 2015, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Kuhl, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Urrico, Mr. Garrand, Mr. Henkel, Mr. Jackoski
NOES: NONE
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, July 22, 2015;
Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon
consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and
Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation,we find as follows:
1. 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? No undesirable
change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood.
2. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to
pursue, other than a sign variance? It's not really practical to seek benefit by another method.
3. Is the requested sign variance substantial? The requested sign variance is not substantial. It's
moderate
4. Will the proposed sign variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions
in the neighborhood or district? It will not have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental
conditions of the neighborhood.
5. Is the alleged difficulty self-created? The alleged difficulty is self-created.
Page 1 of 2
ZBA Decision Resolution (continued)
ZBA Meeting Date: Wednesday, July 22, 2015
Sign Variance Application No. 37-2015, Church of the King, Inc.
6. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance
would outweigh the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or
community;
7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
Based on the above findings I make a MOTION TO APPROVE Sign Variance No. 37-2015,
Church of the King, Inc., Introduced by Michael McCabe,who moved for its adoption, seconded by John
Henkel:
As per the resolution prepared by staff with the following:
A. The variance approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval; you may request an
extension of approval before the one (1) year time frame expires;
B. If the property is located within the Adirondack Park, the approved variance is subject to review by
the Adirondack Park Agency (APA). The applicant is cautioned against taking any action until the
APA's review is completed;
C. Final approved plans in compliance with an approved variance must be submitted to the
Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or
Building & codes personnel'
D. Subsequent issuance of further permits, including sign permits are dependent on receipt of these final
plans;
E. Upon approval of the application; review and approval of final plans by the Community
Development Department the applicant can apply for a sign permit unless the proposed project
requires review, approval, or permit from the Town Planning Board and/or the Adirondack Park
Agency, Lake George Park Commission or other State agency or department.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of July, 2015, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Kuhl, Mr. Garrand, Mr. Urrico, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Henkel, Mr. Jackoski
NOES: NONE
Steven Jackoski, Chairman
Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
SJ/sh
cc: Tom Hutchins, P.E.-Hutchins Engineering
Page 2 of 2