Loading...
Staff Notes Packet for ZBA Wed October 19 2016 (minus draft res) Staff (Votes ZBA Meeting Wednesday, October 19, 2016 @7pm Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Meeting., Wednesday, October 19, 016 Time, 7:00- 11,00 pm Que e ns bury Ac tivitle s Cent er-742 Bay Road Agenda subject to change and may be found at, www.queensbury..net Approval of niecting minuto: Suptumbor 21,2016 OLD,BUSINESS: 7�pplicagt to Michael Dorman rea Variance No PZ-0209-2016 Owner(s) Michael&Kathleen Dormall,Monty& SEORATypc 11 Barbara Calvert _rjenysj_ Tom Center-NZE;i—ine—cring,P,C Lot Slow 2.54 nrcs Location 15;Bonner DrIve-Ward,I Zoning M DR Waril No. .............. Tax Id No 295.11-1-5 179-3-040 Crauts 1Zct S 1'Z-207-2016 Pre][minary Stage 4 arren County Planning n/a �Public Hearing August 24,2016,,0OWber 19,20116 Ad ironda ek Park Ageney n/4 11rhicel Description Applicant proposes a,subdivision ofa 2.54 am:porcel into 3 togs(revised). Project is for three single-Family hornus. Proposed lot sizes: Lot I to,be 0.,4 0=,Lot 2 to be: 1.23 ao,sand[,ol 3 to be 0-60 ac with a hammerhead on Lot 2. Project inolodes waterline extension and sup tics 5tcm,5 for each lot Reljrief reqnested...fi-ommini mum lot size reuiremunt f or thM e DR,zorkiog district, q NEW BUSINESS: Applican (s) RWW A USO a Area Variance No P,�222-2016 Ownvr(sj_ )tick Austin SEQRA Type 11 Agent(s) Flea, Lot Size 0,911 Acre s}_ Location 0 SunsetTrail(Pickle Hill Acres)WaraFl Zoning RR-3A _Wnrd-Nov Tax 1d No 266.1-2-56 Section 179-3-040 Cross Rer n/a V planning 1 00tto or Put 6 1 Adirondack ParKAZPrue t I ALD Proigo Dogription Appliont tmlposes Coll,smictIon of a 1,900 sq,tL sing[c-ffimily dwc1ling with a 864 sq,ft,atloched garaga. Relief rcgucstud from,min Imam Root and side setback re uirenients for the R-3 A zoning district. Applicantisj Harold Gordon Area—Variance No PZ 229-2016 Ownpjs) ga-rold—Gordon 11 AgenlO) Mo an Gazetos Lot Si7A L69 Acre (S) Location 2780 State:Route 91, Zoning WR Ward No. Ward I Tax Id No 239.12-2-88 Section 179-3-040 Cross Ref SP PZ 2ZS-2016;B01 I[-1 133-2016(boathouse Warren Count "lanning Wober 2016 %vi,th sundeck;Legacy Bl�.'2014-059 and SF 34- ' L� 1- 4 2013);B?200�4-363 deck;BP 92-645 corport, I BP 88-412 suruloom addition;3P 85-35�6 SFD,, 88 OP 91-847 Addition -Tul—ric Hearin October 19 2016 Adirondack Pa,r!.LA en� o _L _2� Applicant req uest%approval to complete construction of a 120 sq.fi.deck attuolivcl ki a duck, A bij Ilding permit was issued prior tozonilig review, Reliefrequestedfirom setback requirements for the deck at the shoreline. Planning Board-. Site Plan Review-bardsurlate veitl in 53OU rft�-of ashore line. Pa gc I (if 2 0% Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Meeting. Wednesdoy, October 19, 2016 TIme: 7:00- 11-.00,pm Queensbury ActIVIfies Centr-742 Bay Road Agenda subject to change and maybe found at. www.qqjeensbu,ry.net Ah rricant s Julie Jarvis&Mike Baird Area Variance No 219-20116 Owner(s), Mike Baird SI RA T pe II Agent(s) rva Lot Size 1,4 Acre(s) ['ocation 414 Corinth Road Zoning CLI Ward No. Ward 4 Ta,x Id No JW-15-1-44 Seelion 179-1-040; 179-10-040 Crags Ref Spucial,Usc Permit PZ 221-20,10 SPIE.PZ-220- Warren County Planning Ovtobor 20,16 2016;BP 2010-270 deck,BF 2000-3448 freestanding sign;BP 98-5,07 SrD w/att garagp;BP 94-371 demolition I-carr garage;13P urno,litlon SFD P n—bl Offe i;'Wn 000ibu 19,2016 1 ZWnaicTk tar. jin", arJay Prol eel Description Applicant proposes to uti I iza A,30 K by 60 it-portion of an existing 2„530 sq.ft, build i ag for a d og Wane 1, P lxajeczt InChides,a 454 5q.ft. Ccrued-in aroa. Relief roqacs,ted for dog kennel use less than 200 ft. From tk, proporty,Hilo, R40'al so requested for lot sin less than 10 acres and less than, I-alre per prind to use. Planning Board: Site Plan Rovivo and 9pecial Use Permit for Kennel ................. Applicani(s) Edmund&Janile Brochu --'F rca—Variance No FIZ 237-2016 owneqs) Edmund&Jamit Broohu SE RA Tv ic 11 _AL0FIILSL_. fk+a Lot' ize 0,46 Acre(s) Loefition 76 Peggy Ann Road(Pegg After Park Subd) aping Current MDR Want No. Ward 4 Tax I d fNo 301.14-1-92 Soxtion 179-5-020 Cress Ref BP 9"5-489 SFD Warren Count Public Hearing OctobcT 1'9„2016 Adirondack Park Agency Ti/a P lea Description Applicwit propmes to maintain the already construoted 240 sq, 4,garage addition as Nve 11 as a 288 sq. 11-sceond garage. Applicant proposes to relocate garage where a variance is still reqWred fior setbacks,”"Che building has a door width,greater than 6 ft. and is then a second arca c, Rcl icf rugues~ted for seibwI444 arW a second gara,Lc. Applicard(s) SignVariance No PZ 2�9-2016 ownrdsj_ S,E heal IX Co L.L.C. SEQRA Type, Unlisted, Agent(s) Michael Ore enough, Lot Size 3.113 Acrejsj Location 708 Quaker Road-'Ward,2 Zoning CI Ward No. -T3-IX Id No 303.15-1-12 Section Ckter 140 Cross Ref SPR 51-2015;Sign Var. 1425 yr. 1,988,, BP Warren County Piftnning 6cto bUF2016 200.3-113 9jgrj;BP 947 yr. 1970 Sig)i-,1313-727 yr 1970 sign;131"725 Sian-.BPa i rY . Pu 4I.Lelk!ri nOctober 19z 2016 Andiron(lack ParLARe� Wo. --X Prqkel Phicription App]iLant Proposes installation of 90 sq, 11. wall sign on the bui ldring fnicj,ng Qijaker Road- Relie r requested from allowable niaximurn sign size and minfilium setback requiremcnts. ,Arty fortber business that the Chairman determines may be properly brought Mine the Zoning Roara ofAppeals. PW2of2 Firtal ZBA Agenda Versiaiv, 09.29.20 16 Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development 1 rimeni Staff Notes Areae grimace No.. PZ 209-2016 Project Applicant. Miebael Dorman Project 1110catiork. 35 Honner Drive—Ward 3 Pared History: SUB PZ 2071-2016 Pre]hninary Stage SEQR T" pe: Type 11 Meeting Date: October 19,2016 Descriptio n of Proposed.Project. Appl icant proposes a subdivision of a 2.54 acre parcel into 3 lots (revised). Protect is for three single-f1imily homes,. Proposed lot si74s, Lot I to be 0.40 ac; Lot 2 to be 1.23 ac, and Lot 3 to be 0.60 ac with a hammerhead on Lot 2. Project includes waterliae, extension and septic systems for each lot. Relief requested from minima lot size requirement for the MDR.zoning district. I Relief IIequi:rcdJ, The applicant requests the following relief- Relief requested froin rninimurn required lot sizes for the MDR Zoning district. Seetion 179-3-040,lLstzl2lishments of District Dimensional requirpillents, The MDR nom,- requires 2 acres per lot when not connected to town sewer and water. The applicant proposes on-site septic and municipal water. The lots sizes proposed are Lot I to be,0,40 ac; Lot 2 to be 1.23 ac, and Ut 3 to be 0.60 ac. Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to' 'ha p;ter 267 of Town I.aw: In making a deterniinaijolt, the board shall consider. 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighbor bood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created 4y flie granting of this area varianee. Minor impacts,to the neighborhood may be anticipated. The applicant has indicated the lots are similar sizes to the adjoining parcels along the same street., 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 size of the lot and the zoning requirements for development. 3. Whether the IVqaested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered substantial relevant to the code., W here relief requested for lot 1, is 1.6 ac, lot 2 is 0.77 ac, and I ot 3 is 1,Ao 4. Whetber the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project may have minimal impact where the design inctudes storrriwa(er and erosion control measures. in addition, the Town Elighway and Town Water Department are reviewing the project. 5. Whether the alleged dirffiCtdt�'WVIS Self-created. The difficulty may be considered, self",ereated. staffcornmentsd The applicant proposes a.3-lot subdivision,of a 154 ac parcel where 2 ac per lot is required. The applicant has revised the plans,frornr a.4-lot to a 3-lot su bdivis ion as pail of the Zoning Board's previous d iscu ssion, The,applicant has indicated the lots are similar to the nei,gliboring lots and has provided the subdivision proposed prior to zoning. The project includes development of a hammerhead turnaround,the extension of Bonner Drive and the extension Of the waterline. Zoning; Board of Appeals —Record of Resolution. on. Town of Queerisbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 61-8238 Area Variance Resolution To: Approve/ Disapprove rrove ApplicantName: Michael Dorman File Number, PZ- 09-2016 Location- 3513onner Drive Tac Maly Number: 295.11-1- BA Meeting putt: Wednesday, October 1 , 2016 The Zoning Board of appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Michael Dorman. Applicant proposes a subdivision of a 2..54 acre pared into 3 lets (revised). Project is for three sing]e-E nlil homes. Proposedlot sizes; l„tet 1 to be 0.40 ac; Lot 2.to be 1..23 ac, and Lot 3 to be 0.6ac with a harnmerhead on Lot 2. Project includes waterline extension and septic systems for each lot. Relief requested from minimum Int size requirement for the MDR zoning district, Relief Required: fired: Tlie applicant requests the following relief. Relief`requested from niffi turn required lot sizes for the MDR zoning district. Section 179-3-040 KEtLblisliments of District Dimensional rc uire entice. I lie MDR zoite requires, 2 acres p(-,r lot +lien not connected to town sewer and water. Tile applicant proposes ort-site septic and in unicipal garter. The lots sizes proposed are Lot 'l to lie 0,4 ac; 'Lott 2 to be 1.23 ac, and 1,0t 3 to be 0,6ar,. SEQR Type 1.1 -- no further review required; public hearing was advertised and hell on ,August 24, 2016 and left open; October 19,201 Upon review of the application materials, information supplied. dosing the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria, specified in Section 179-14-0 a) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 f NY S Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows: PEJ TllF l�RAF-1” 1'l t::l "J.l)ED BY STAFF 1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2. feasible alternatives r e and have been considered by the board, are reasonable and have been nctuded to minimize the s ue tOR are npt pe�sible. . The it,quested variance is /is not substantial because 4. There rs I is not an. adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or d:striet`? ,� Tae 1 of 5. The alleged difficulty—is-.? is snot self-created because 6. In addition. the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting thy, requested variance would (m?roval) / wokild b hqd bSjdqi�,iial the resulting detriment to the health, sat"et and 'it � out)ff�jg_ y welfare o he neighborhood or community; 7. The Board also finds that the variance! request u�nder consideration is the minimurn necessary-, 8. The Board also proposes the following conditions, a) b) ............. ma c), Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. BASED, ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A. MUTION TO APPROVE" / DENY AREA VARIANCE PZ-0209-201,6 Michael Dorman, Introduced by who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 19"' day of(") ober 2016 by thefollowing vote: AYES- NOES: Page 2 of 2 Town of Queensbury Zoning Boord of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Noies Area Variance No,: PZ 222-2016 Project Applicant: Rick Austin Project Location: 0 Sunset Trail (Pickle Hill Acres) —Ward I Parcel History: Pichie Hill Acres Subdivision—prior to zoning SEQR Type: Type 11 Meeting Date. October 1,9, 2016 I'D!........................... s c i!iption of Pr oposed Applicart(proposes construction of a 1,800 sq. ft. single-fiarnily dwelling with a 864 sq. ft. attached garage. Relief Re The applicant requests the following relief: Relief requested from niinimurn front and side setback requirements for the R]R-3A, zoniTig district. Section VT9j- ,,-k4Q Dimensionagqul rirements—Rural Desi dgnfigL2_qcry.Ko_ne The proposed home is to 'be located 60 11 from the front property lune ne where 100 ft setback is required. Then the north side yard setback is proposed to 'be 6&1 ft where a, 75 ft setback is required. kriteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 offown L'R,.w:,l In malking 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,ptvperfies will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor to no impacts to the neighborhood may be anti6pattd. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an arca variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered limited as any new,development on this parcel would be subject to a request for variances. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested inay be considered, moderate relevant to the code. Relief is requested for 40 ft in the front yard and 8.9 ft at thenorth side yard. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neigbborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or environmental conditions, in the neighborhood may be anticipated, 5. Wliether the alleged diffl-culty was seff-created. The difficulty may be considered not self-created as the parcel is a pre-existing nonconforming parcel with an existing garage. The parcel was part of a 1964 subdivision that pre- dated the Toning in the area, staff omnxerrtsi The applicant proposes the construction of a single family home of 1,800 sq ft with an attached 864 sq ft garage. The rel ief requested is fear setbacks for the RR3 A zone that is associated for parcels that are 3 ac or larger—1b0 ft. front a,nd 75 ft. side am dic required setbacks. The parcel was part of the Pickle Bill Acres Subdivision. The applicant has, provided a survey, proposed home layout, and information on the septic and well location. Town of Queensbury Zoning Boolrd of Appeals Community Devel,opmeni Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: PZ 229-2016 Project Applicant: Harold Gordon Project Location: 2780 ' trate Route 9L—'l and I Parcel History: SP PZ 228-2016; BOTH 133-2016 (boathouse with sundeck; Legacy UP 2014-059 and SP 34-2013); BP 2004- 6 , deck; HP92-645 carport; BP 89-412 sunroom addition; RP 85-356 SFD; BP 91-847 Addition SEQR Type: Type H Meeflug Pate- October 1 ,201+ ]Description,of Proposed Project: Applicant requests approval to complete construction of a 120,sq, ft.,deck attached to a dock. A building permit was, issued prior to zoning review. Area Variance and Site Plan Review were determined to be necossary after the, fact, Relief Re uired: The applicant request&the following relief: Relief requested from setback requirements for the deck at the shoreline. Section '17x9-3-04.!0_-Di mensional requirements The:shorelinedeck is located. 0 ft from the shoreline where a 50 ft setback is required, on the north side property line 23.5 ft and on the south side property line 19 ft where a 25 ft setback is required,. Side setback inforination has, been forwarded from LGI-IC site inspection --a survey would provide the actual distance) C,ritcriR for considering an Area Variance acem-ding 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 grArUting of this area variance. Minor impacts to the neioy iborhood may be anticipated. The applicant has indicated a concrete pad in. the same area was removed and the now wood deck to connect to the dock was QoTistructed. 2. Whether the bencrit 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 reduce the deck size on the sides. 3, Whether the requested area variance is,substantial, The relief requested niay he considered moderate relevant to the code. Relief is requested for the north property linel.5 ft,and the south property line 6 ft. 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 environmental conditions of the area. 5. Wbetiter the allegO difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered. self-created. Staff J comments,, I I I I I—.� The applicant has,pi ov ided plans that show the location of the deck under construction. The applicant has worked with Staff for submission of the variance and, site plan materials for the review. The LGPC recent site visit has indicated the dock is non-compliant and at this time it is not clear if that would impact the deck location. Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department 5taff Notes Area Variance No.: PZ 219-2016 Project Applicant. Julie Jarvis & Mike Baird Project Location: 414 Corinth Road —Ward 4 Parcel History: Special Use Permit PZ 221-2016/SPR PZ-220-2016; SPR 62-1.990; AV30-1990, 13P 2010-270 deck; BP 2000-3448 freestanding sign; BP 98-507 SFD w/att garage; BP 94-371 demolition 1-car garage; BP 99-�268 demolition SFI) SEQR Type-, Type 11 meeting Date; 0 ctober 19,2016, Descriptil ol n, of P roposed P roj ect: Applicant proposes to utilize a 30 ft. by 60 ft. pottion of an, existing 2,530 sq. ft. building flor a dog kennel. Project includes a 454 sq. ft. fenced-in area.. Relief The applicant requests the IbIlowing relief- Relief requested for dog kennel use less than 200 ft. ftorn the property line, Relief also requested, for lot siie! less than 10 acres and less,than 11-acre per principle use. 179-3-040 Establishment of Zoning District—densi1Y One acre per principle use is required in the CLI —Commercial Light Industrial, The project site has an existing Sign business and a single family residence. A portion of the existing building will include the existing sign business and the kennel facility 179-10-070 Special Use permit specific standards Kennel, use requires '10 ac arid.to be setback 200 ft, from property line. The current lot size is 1.4 ac. The fenced in area of the kennel is to be 4 ft 1.1 in Criteria for considering an Area Variance accordini,to Chapter 267 of Town In making a determination, the board shall consider: 1. Whether art 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 rmay be anticipated. The project area has existing residential, commercial, industrial type uses. 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 he considered lirnited, due to the, existing site conditions. This includes having an existing two principle uses on a lot where:a,third is proposed and the parcel is 'l.4 ac in size. The lot size relief 1.6 ac for principal, use and 8,6 ac for fennel use. The existing building and proposed faced in area is less than 200 ft from the property line for kennel usage. Relief requested is 195 ft 1 in. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substaotial, The relief requested n-my be considered substantial relevant to the code. 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 will have mini.M. al environmental impact on the neighborhood., 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self created. The difficulty may be considered self-created tuff"carnrraeruts: The applicant proposes to operate a kennel facility for up to 35 dogs in shared spaces. The project involves tailizing a 30 ft. by 60 ft. poition of an existing 2,530 sq. ft. building for the dog kennel. The applicant has indicated that dogs will be taken on leash to the 454 sq., ft. fenced-in area and then brought back inside. The plans show the interior arrangment of the:kennel spaces and the fence is shown on the site drawings. Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of p,peals mm: nit Development Department Staff Notes A rea Variance No,: PZ 237-201.6 Project Applicant. Edmund & Jamie Broclitt Project Location,: ?r 6 Peggy Arun Road (Peggy Ann Park Sub)— and 4 Parcel History- RP 95-489 SFD SEQR,Type: Type 11 Meeting Date. October 19',2016 LD�esc—ripfion of Proposed Projects Applicant proposes to maintain the already constructed 240 sq, ft. garage addition as well as a 288 sq. R. second gat-age. Applicant proposes to relocate garage wherea variance is still require 'Icer setbacks. The building has,a door width greater than 6 ft. and is then a second garage. ReliefRequired: The applicant rNuests the following relief, Relief requested for setbacks and a second garage. Section 179-5-t70—Ae ppe - -AmourRs ra e The applicant requests approval ofsecond garage that is 288 sq ft and [orated in the north east coiner of the lot. A recent survey shows the garage to be over°the property line where the applicant proposes to move the building so there is a 5 11, rear setback where a 30 ft setback is required and a 5 ft side setback where 5 ft is the required setback. In. addition, the 240 sq ft garage addition is a fourth bay Criteria for considering an Area Variance accordiug to Cha eter.267 of Town aw'. 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 ot"(10s.area variance. The projeet may be oonsidered to have little to no impact on the neighboring propertiesas the 2, Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method,feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an siren variance. The fleasible alternatives may be limited as the applicant is attQmpting to store garden equipment and antique truck,. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantiaL., The relief may be considered substantial relevant to the cede. Relief is requested for second garage:where only one garage is alloNved. 4. Whether the proposed variante will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditious in (lie neighborhood ar 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 cicated. I Suff cormrnentsj The applicant, requests to relocate a 2,8,8 sq ft garage building to the rear of the property where a variance is required. The applicant has indicated that neighborinproperties also have their sheds, located nearby. 'rhe applicant has requested to maintain a 240 sq ft gaiuge addition that is, subject to building and codes requirements. The plans show the location of the existing detached garage and the ga.rage:addition. T'own ,of Queensbur,y Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Skiff Notes Sign Variance No.: PZ-00238-2016 Project Applicant: Smart Wash SEOR Type: Unlisted Parcel History: S1137-2015, Special Sales Event 1I 140-2016, SP '51-2015,SV 1,425 Meeting Date: October 19, 2016 Description of Proposers Pro Applicant proposes, installation of 90 sq. ft., wall sign on the building facing Quaker Road. Relief requested fiorn, allowable maxiinurn sign.size and minimum setback requirements. Relief Required: I The applicznt requests the, following refief. Relief requested from sign setback.restrictions for the Main Street zoning district. Section 140-6 Siggs, for which permits are required Applicant propsoes a 90 sqft wall sign where the rna xiurn, size allowed is 30 sq ft wall sign is allowed. The sign location is, less than 100 ft from the front property line where the existing building is 8 9 ft. F64—eria for considering a Sign Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law: In inaldng 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 sign varianee. Minimal impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. 2. Whether the benefit sought iby the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than a sign variance. Feasible alternatives may be possible to reduce the size signs 3. Whether the requested sign, variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered substantial relevant to the code. Relief is requested for 60 sq ft. 4. 'Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical Or enviroomental conditions in the neighborhood, or district. The project as proposed may have minimal impact on the environmental conditions of the district. S. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff corn The applicant proposes as 90 sq ft wall, sign to replace: an existing wall sign Bor the: car wash facility. The plans show the existing signage that has been since removed and the proposed signage.