Staff Notes - Complete Staff Notes,
IncludesAgenda, Draft ZBA Resolutions
ZBA Meeting
Wednesday, February 15, 20 17
Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda
Meefing: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 TIme, 720- 11:00 pm
Qu nsbury ury Activifie 5 Center— 742 Bay R oa d
Agenda subject to change and may be found at: www.queensbury.net
Approval of mecting rn intttes,„ January 18, 2017'
KEW,RUSl,Nr,$S.
Applicant(s) Ronald&Cyolhia Mackowiak Arco Voriance No Z-AV-9-2017
Owner(s) Ronald&Cynthia MaclkowirA ST RA Ty ,c 11
Aggnt(s)............... Hutchins Fil itieerlrg—Luras Dobie Lai Size 0.132 acres
Location 9 Glcn Hall Drive Zoning WR
Ward No. Word I
'17OX Id No 289.11-1-33 Section 179-5-020
Cross Ref P-SII-9-2017;BOTH 176-2015 Septic Alt.; Warren County Planning nia
CTP'201"M demo most of resi dunc�-,BP
2014-392 Rus. Add.&AIC and bmillont;�BP
201.4-024 dk)ok
Public [learing February 15,2017 J Aldi rondat Ik Pork Agtna_ n1a
Project TItscription- Applicant proposes construction of a 440 sq,ft.detached garagc,.Prqjcul is also at second garage as existing,290 sq,&
canvas shed is to remain.Relief requestedCrani rninimum 5ctbqwk mcguiromertis oath rot a second garage. Hanning Board; Site Pion Rc%,icw
rc_qu Ire L
Applicant(5) New Cingplar Wireless,PCS,LLC ,�T�i C Ilse Variance: No ZUV-1-2017
Owner(s) Kubricky ConstrLlClion Corp. - 5E IXVe Unlisted
_69�73t$' -phi HiRs LytIc LLP- Thomas F.Puchncr,Esq. TO—isize 9.23 Acre(s)
Location 1359 Ridge Road Zoning MDR
Ward No. Ward I
Tax lei No 279,00-149 i Section 179-5-1301C
Cross Ror P-SP-1 2,,2017,UV 57-2015 expired approval; Warren County Planoin'g February 2017
SP 55-2015
Public Mating February 15,2017 Adirondack Park Agcoey 11 ALD
Project Description: Appliountproposcs instellatiori oind operation Ora 130-lbot wireless telccommunivations 14cility and related
eqvipimot.on as vacant parcel- Raiierregpested from restriction for placement ora tcleournmunicaliom tower i1g,MDR zoninf district
MaEy'Sotanski Area Variance No Z-AV40-2017
Owfles) Mary Sotanski 1;<A"1 11 —
_tNIants rVa Lot Size 4.87 acres
Location 21 1 filand OrIve Zoning RR-IA
Ward No, Ward I
Tax Irl No 290,10-1-0 Scotion 179'-3-040
Cross Ref P-SH,Prel.2-2017, P-SB Final.3-2017;B11 Warren,County Planning n/a
2004-640 Addition&Alterations;BP 4049
6
V.u blic 11carlag February 15,2017 Adirondack Park,Agync,y n/a —
Project Description: Applicant proposes a,two-lot subJJ%,[,Sk)O of 4T acre parcel into one'lot of 1.87 acres and one lot of 3 acres to,be
retained by owner w[th existing single-family rosi,(Wuce, Relief requested from ininimuni lot size rcquiremonls for the newly created lots.
P I anning Board-_ Subdivision Review for mu lot subdivision.
Page I of3
Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda
Meeling: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 Time: 7:00- 11:00,pm
teensbu'ry Activities Center-742 Bay Rood
Agenda subject' to�:honge sand may be found at. www.queerisbury.net
Applicant(s) DISC Holdings, Inc. -I Area Va ria nee No Z- V-9-2017
O,wner(s) DKC Holdings,Ina- SC rt Type
Agento) VanDuscn and Stevcs l(A t S i yi-, Lot 30: 12,000 sq.%,Lut 29:
Location 63 Illinois Avenue Zoning NR
Ward No. Ward 4
Tax Id,No 109.9-1-30 and 29 Section
Cross ftef P346,yr, 1980 mobi Ic home Warren County Plj!!niur n1a.
PU I I ic Hearing February 15,2017 Adiro ad a ek Park Agency Ida
Project Dowriptioo, ,applicant proposes a lot fine adjustment for tivo,existing parcels_ Parcel 3094-1-30 existing is,12,000 sq-ft-and to
be reO oced to 7,500 sq.ft, Adjoining parcel 309.9-1-29 existing 3,000 sq,ft.to be increased to 7,5 00 sq.R. Re I ie r re"e,%ted fbr furtherance
ofanonouflforni.in lot.
App kant(s) Stephen&Car LaFleche Aren Variance No Z-AV-1 1-2017
Stephen&Ca. n LaFkThcF 1�, 1�pe H
_1�_IL _
Agent(s) tennis MacEI:Ty,Env,Desi tr Tartar rshi Lot Size
Location 12 Wmtcrs rldgo D(ivo Zoning WR
Ward No. wurd I
TaxId No 22'7.17-1-29 Seetion 17q-3-040' i79mm13=010
Cross Ref BP 2010-553 Boathouse, B?2,0 1l0-539 Demo Warren County Planning Fcbmary 2017
of Boathouse-,BP 20 -135 Septic All.;RP
20,09-567'Res. Alt,
Pubtic lle-an"M" February.15 200 Adirondaek Pa Agency ALD
Project Descri ptio n: Appli rant proposes W reiiovate a 697 sq.ft.floor area portion of the see md floor of an existing home. The Pew
construction on the norrilleast side and shoreline does not meet the required sobaolks, Reliefrequested fivin minimum setback requirements
for the WK zoning district. Planning.Board: Site Plan Review required f'or expansion ofa nonconforming structure in a Critical,
Envimnrnental Area.
Alipfiennt(s) Srhorknc Morebouse Area Variance No Z-A'V-7-2017
wroe Sharlene Morchouse 8' MA'ryVe 11
Agent(s) nla Lot Size 0.18 4wres
Location 497 Sherman Avenue 'awning MDIk
Ward No. Ward 4
Tax Id No 308.8-2-12 Section 179-3-040
Crass Ref BP 208-313 Gs, Md.itjon,—131"2004-240 2- 7—Warren County Planning, n/a
cot dot,(rarage,BE'95-184 above ground
1�qolj 6P 8943�212 Alterations- AV'5.3-2008
Park ency
I-ebruary [,5,' dirondac It Ag
Pub, I ' I n/a
Projcct Description: Appl icant proposes construction of a, 150 sq. ft.rusideridal addition(dining room)to an ex Wing 1,080 Sq. It.hole.
11e project includes a 120 sq., R.portion of the 4[ ing area that is exist i rig and to be removed,titan rewostructed with a 30 sq.ft.,addition,,
n,
riew lbmrint—630 sq.ft., Re lief requested from minimum se!ha�re uir�ernems for the MDR zovingdistrict-
Page 2 ot'l
Queensbury Zoning Board' of Appeals Agenda
Meeting. Wednesday, February 15, 201,E Time. 7-00- 11:00 Prn
Queensbury Activifies Center—x42 Bay Road
agenda subject to change and may be found ot., www.queens'bury.net
Apv,licantMichael Knidus Area VOrriance No Z- V-6-2011
Owner 51 Michael Kaidas
L SEQRA jy2L_ 11
Agent(s) kida Lot Size 0.91 acres
Location 119 Scelyc Road Zoning WR
Word No. Ward I
Tale 114 No 227.17-1-50Seet:inn 17'9 3-11411
Cross Ref 7-,-AV-5-2017 (gazebo anal lot line Warren County Planning Fcbruary2017
.1 Ad Ustment)
1'aadrldc dleaarin February 15,2017 Ad ironda ck jlaEh�rt rna � ALD
Project Descriplion: Applicant proposes dcrnolition ofl,345sq_ ft-wood frame ho.nic and to leave the stone rirerlace- Alae project
involves a lot line adju stmunt with The edJoining lot, 119 Seelye Road existing lot size is 0.93 uores awned will be reduced to 0.89 acres. The
Tiow lot lino places the steams~fireplace on parcel 227.17-149,(113 Scelyc Road)where the lot size is 0.93 acres and aril I be inoteesed 14)0.96
acres- Re]ie r reg nested from ruini mum,lot size requirenicnis For Ibc WR wain distflet.
Applicant(s) MiCNWI Kaidos A rest Var�ia nce No Z-A'V-5-2017
Ownw sl Michael Kaidas RA TV oo 11
Agent(s) n/A Lot sizx 0.90 acres
I'Deflition t 13 Seelye Road Zoning WR
Ward No. Ward 1
Tax I—d No 217,17-1,49 Section 179-3-041)
Cross Ref Z.-AV-6-2017(lot I i tic adjustalf Y Planni g.......... F0 tebrualy 27
ub!!c�� FC13TLIag� 15.2011 Ad imndack Park Agency ALD
Project Deseriplion: Applicant pmposeS 00115trUCtion of a 250 sq.ft,upon gvebo utilizing the:existing stone FITeplavo.The prt�ject
involves a lot line adjustment with Ilio adjoining lot; 119 Soelyo Road existing tot size is 0.93acrcs and will be reduced to 0.89 acres. 'rho
new lot Zinc pkv os the stone JIMPIOCo on parcel 227-17-1-49(113 Seel ye Road)where the lot.,size is 0.93,acres and will be increased to 0.96
acres. Rc lic f req uested rrom rroio[roum setback,re uireraaents-for the jazebo in the WR 1,011ing district.
Any finiher business that the Chairman determines may be ptoperly Drought before the Zoning Board ofApPeals.
Revised Version; 0 1,27 2017 A(coffectLd date I&Wf Y PL: Z-UV-1-201.7)
Final V`eT,.ijojj, 01,2(120 17 MLMisli
Page 3 of 3
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development. Department 'Staff Notes
Area Variance No.: 8-20,17
Project Applicant: Ronald & Cynthia Mackowiak
Project Location- 9 Glen Hall Drive
Meeting Date- February 15, 2017
SEQR Type: Type 11
Description of'Propose
Applicant proposes construction of a 440 sq. ft. detached garage. Project is also a second garage as
existing 290 sq. ft. canvas shed is to,remain. Relief requested from minimum setback requirements and for
a,second garage. Plartning Board: Site Plan Review required as freestanding structure is located within
50, ft, of slopes that are in excess of 1.5 percent.
Relief Req:u ired J
The applicant requests relief from the minirnum setback requirements and for a second garage.
Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts dimensional requirements, — Waterfront Residential Zone -
WR
The new garage is to be located 5 ft., on the north, 6.5 �ft, on the south side and where a 20 ft. setback is
required and 12 ft on the east where a 30 11 setba.& is required,
'epi 17�9�- -02 amcce t u r e
A detached second garage, is proposed,where only one garage is allowed
Criteria f6r considering on Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Tow
In making a determination, the board shall consider:
'I. Whether an undesinable 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. A few neighboring properties,also have garages.
,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 configuration of the parcel and the existing home on the site. Possible alternatives could be
considered to renovate the garage storing boat items although case of access to the home would be
limited.
3, Whether the mquested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered
substantial relevant to the code. Where relief is requested for having two garages and, only one is
allowed. The setback relief would be considered substw,itial also where 1.5 ft relief ror north, 13.5
from the south side and 18 ft from the east is 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 may be considered to have
minimal impact on the physical or the environmental conditions, of the area. The plans include
ston'riwater measures gutter downspout and infiltration; also shown is a boulder wall along the north
side of the buil dingL'
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty rr�ay be considered self-created.
staff coin
The applicant proposes to construct a, 440 sqft. second garage on a 0.81 acre parcel that has an existing
home. The applicant proposes, to maintain the portable garage structure on the site for storage of the boat.
The applicant intends to, itmove canvas shed as part of the project as shown on the plans. The project is
a]so subject to site plan review due to the location of'steeps slopes near the site.
Parcel History ( on structionIsite plaulvarbmee, Ote-Y
J
P-SP-9-2017; SP 9-2014 garage/addition/septic; 74-20,14 garage; PZ 59-2016 garage BOTJ4 376-2015
Septic Alt.; BP 2015-058 demo most of residence; BP 2014-392 Res. Add. & Alt. and basement,; BP
2014-029 dock
Zoning Board of Appeals
Commun[ty Development Department Staff Notes
Zoning Board of Appeals–Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road, Queensbury,NY 12804 (51 8) 761-8238
Talvra Cyr("Lucertsbury
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve/Disapprove
Applicant Name: Ronald &Cynthia Mackowiak
File Number: Z-AV-8-2017
Location,- 9 Glen Hall Drive
Tax Map Number: 289.11-1-33,
ZHA Mecting Date: Wednesday,February 15, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application fi-om Ronald & Cynthia
Mackowia R� , Applicantproposes construction of a 440 s+ ft. detached garage.Project is also a second garage as existing
290 sq. fl. canvas shed is to remain. Relief requested from ininimum setback requirements and fora.second garage.
Planning Board- Site:Plan review required as freestanding structure is located within 50 1 . ofslopes that are in excess of
15 percent.
'I"he applicant.requests relief from the minimum setback requirements,and for a second garage.
e i n I - :249-&�.Uhlnent ofwawrf
,yont FpsidprilialZpi -WR
—--je
The,new garage is to be located 5 ft. on the north, 6.5 ft. on the south side and where a 20 ft., setback is required,and 12 ft.
on the east where a 30 ft setback is required.
5 c
rej,jQ11 I
7 --5 A- 20 gepegM struclures -ggrugg,
A detached second garage; is proposed, where only one garage is allowed.
SEQR Type 1T–no farther review required;,
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, Februm 15, 2017-5
Upon review of the application materials, information. supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the
criteria specified in Section 179-14-1080(A) of'the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after
discussion and deliberation, we find as follows,
l"T",R"ITH', DRAFT PROVIDI'll) 13Y STAJaj`
L There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to, nearby properties
because
2, Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board are res 9noble jn
' a
to minimize the request OIC are not possible.
3. The requested variance is I is not substantial because
4. There is/ is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district?
S. Is the alleged difficulty is I',is not self-created because
6In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant Froin granting the requested variance Would outweigh
k 9,Porol Y-46,-LYmid—tMA ji
J&tL 4 �y
.1w ,q. eni,a,j,) the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the:
yg _,(�j
neighborhood or commurtity',
7. The Soard also,finds that the variance request ander consideration is the minimum 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,resolutian.
BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, 1. MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE
Z-AV-8-2017. Ronald &Cynthia Mackowiak, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 15'h day of February 2017 by the following vote-
AYES.,
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Commun[ty Development Departmeni Staff Notes
U'se Variance No.. 1-2017
Project Applicant: New Cingular Wireless,, PCS, LLC (AT&T)
Project Location: 1.359 Ridge:Road, Queensbury/MDR Zone
Parcel History UV 57-201,5, SP 55-2015 (expired approvals) P'-SP 1.2-2017'
SEAR Type: Unlisted
Meeting Date; February 15,2017
De.S,CE!E!!M,of'PMoscd,
Applicant proposes installation and operation of a 130-foot wireless telecommunications facility and related
equipment on a vacant parcel. Relief requested from restriction for placement of a telecommunications tower in
a MDR.zoning district
Relief Required,.
j
Parcel will require a use variances as follows,. 179-5-130 Telecarm-nunication.Towers—desinated areas where
relief is requested.to locate the tower in a MDR zone that is not one of the allowed zones lot a new cell tower
location.
Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Tow
In making a determination, the board shall consider.
The four. (4) criteria usually associated with a use variance are different in this case, Verizon Wireless is
consider a public utility under New York decisional law (Cellular Telephone Company v. Rosenberg, 82N,Y 2d
364(1993) and, a provider of"personal wireless service3"' under the Telecommunications.Act of 1996. As a
result of these decisions, the following are to be shown by the public utility in order to gain a use vanian.ee-
L) That the .proposed improvement is a public necessity in that it is required to render safe and
adequate service. The applicant has provided detail information about the gap in service of this area
and the ability to place a structure with minimal impact to the surrounding area.
2.) That there are compelling reasons, economic and otherwise,for permitting the variance. The
applicant has provided that,service:gap will be reduced by the placement of the structure and the height
of the structure
3.) Where the infrusion or burden on, the community is minimal, the showing required by the utility
should be correspondingly reduced. The applicant has provided site evaluation materials as outlined,
in the code. In addition the applicant has been working with the APA with site and environmental
review process. The applicant's project may be considered to be at a minimal and still provide the
capacity needed, for the area of coverage,
Staff COM
The applicant proposes to utilize a 10,000 sq. ft. area to install a 130 ft. monopole cellular tower and associated
equipment The applicant has indicated that the area, will, be fenced in with a 40 x 60 ft. area and to include an
equipment shelter and a generator, The site is a new cell tower and is subject to a use variance for utility usage.
The application provides details, of reviewing sites that have an existing tower for shared use and, locating in
areas that allow new towers where neither met the needs of placeinent of a new tower, The applicant has
provided a visual analysis and gap coverage maps. The project is located in the Adirondack Park where the
,AP'A has requested the applicant add, to the top of the 'tower a tree firnb appearance. The applicant is also
completing the necessary materials for NYSDEC as the project site has an existing mining permit that is subject
to modification with.the DEC.
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Dervelopmenf Department Staff Notes
Zoning Board of Appeah—Record of Resolution
Townof Queeiisbuiy 742 Bay Road Qu"iisbuiy,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
Rmn dQ1,p"'foskiry
Use Variance Resolution To: Approve /Disapprove
Applicant Name: New Cingular Wireless, PCS, LLC (AT&T).
File Number: Z-OV-1-20,17
Location: 1359 Ridge Road
Tax Map Number,: 279.00-1-48
Z13A Meeting Date: Wednesday, February 15, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Towyn of Queensbury has received an, application from New
Cingular Wireless, 11CS, LLC (AT&T). Applicant proposes, installation and operation of 1 0-foot
wireless telecommunications facility and related equipment on a vacant parcel. Relief requested from
restriction for placement of a telecorninunications tower in a MDR zoning district
Parcel will requite a use variances as follows': 179,-5-130 'f'elecommunica�tioti Towers,—designated ,area
where relief is requested to locate the tower in a MDR zone that is not one of the a]lowed zones for a new
cell tower,location
The four (4) criteria usually associated with a Use Variance are.,
I.) That the proposed improvement is a public,necessity in that it is required to render safe and
adequate service. It is our finding that:
2.) That there are:compelling ieasons, economic and otherwise, for permitting the variance. It is our
finding'that:
3.) Where the intrusion or burden on the community is minimal, the showing required by the utility
should be correspondingly reduced. It is our finding that-
Based upon our findings, above, we hereby determine that the applicant [ HAS ] [ HAS NOT j
demonstrated that the applicable zoning regulations and restrictions have caused unnecessary hardship.
'cel .° use thefiollowinon4when,approving a use variance.) The Board finds that the variance under
consideration is the minimum necessary and adequate to address,the unnecessary hardship proven by the
applicant arid. at the same time preserve and protect,the character of the neighborhood and the health,
safety and welfare of the community, I
Based upon all of the above, I move that this Board [ Approve Deny] Use Variance No. Z-U'V-1
2017 New Cingular Wireless, PCS, LLC (AT&T), with the following conditions:
Duly adopted this 15'6 day of February, 201'7, by the fol lowing vote:
AYES:
NOES.
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No.: 10-2017
Project Applicant: Mary Sotariski
Project Location- 21 Hiland Drive
kSEQR Type- Type 11
Meeting Dater: February 15, 2017
Description of Proposed
applicant proposes,a two-lot subdivision of a 4.187 acre parcel into one I at of 1.87' acres and one lot of 3 acres to be
retained by owner with existing single-family residen.ce. Relief requested from minimum lot size requirements for
the newly created lots. Planning Board: Subdivision Review for two lot subdivision.
Relief Required:
The applicant request relief from minimurn. lot size require�ments for,the,Rural Residential 3 ac zoning.
Section 179-3-040 Establishments of District Dimensional requirements,
The RR-3a, zone requires. 3 acres per lot. The applicant proposes to maintain an existing home on lot I at 3.00 ac
and lot at 1.87 ac.
Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Cha ter 267,of Town Law.
fn making Or determination,the board shall consider:
1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the ebaratter 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. 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 requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered, substantial
relevant to the code, Where relief requested for the new lot of 1.87 ac is 1.13 ac.
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 have minimal impact on the physical or
environmental conditions of the neighborhood.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Parcel History(constructionisite plan/variance,cls.J)
P- 13 Prd, 2-2017; P-SB Final 3-2017;BP 2004-640 Addition &Alterations; BP 4049 SFD yr 197'6
IstaffCOMFniig
The applicant pi-opuses to maintain the existing home on, the 3 ac parcel and the, 1 87 ac of vacant land to be, sold.
The applicant is requesting from the planning board a waiver for providing information on the location of the
home, septic and well for the vacant lot. The applicant has shown the proposed vacant lot has a buildable area of
7,524 sq ft and the 100 It setback requirernents of the zone.
Zoning
Boas d of Appeals
Community Development DepcOmerpt Staff Notes
Zoning Board of Appeals— Record of Resolution
bury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518 761-8238
Town of Queens
Area Variance Resolution Tou: Approve / Disapprove
Applicant Name. Mary Sotanski
File Number: Z-AV-10-2017
Location: 21 Hiland Drive
Tax Map Number: 0.10-1-6
ZBA Meeting Date: 'February 15, 2 017
The,Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Mary Sotanski, Applicant
proposes a two-lotsubdivision of a,4.87 acre parcel into one lot of.1.97 acres,and one lot of,3 acres to be retained by
owner with existing single-family residence. Relief requested from minimum lot size requiremants for the newly oreated
lints. Planning B=-d: Subdivision Review fortwo lot subdivision.
Relief Required:
The applicant request relief from minimum lot size requirements for the Rural Residential 3 acre zoning.
Section 179-3-040 Establishments,of District Dimensional requirements.
The 1 R-3a zone requires 3 acres per lot. The applicant proposes to maintain an existing horne, on lot I at 3,00 ac and lot 2
at 1.87 ac.
SEER Type II—no further review required,
A public hearing was advertised and,held.an Si ednesday. S
,yp!L�jLary L _LQ 1.J;
Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the
criteria specified in Section 179-14-090{A) of the Queensbury Town Code and, Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after
discussion and deliberation, we find as follows:
"n 13Y S"I'A[T
1, There; j%,Zj1§ gfg an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties
because
2. Feasible alternativeg are, and have, been considered by the Board, are re, a,'.aijqbl9 and hay, gn included,
5 y
to minimi n the request OR am not Ws
;3.r The requested variance is I is,not substantial
4. There is/ is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district?
5. Is the alleged difficulty is/is no self-created because
6. In addition the Board finds that the benefit, to the applicant from granting the requested variance
(approval) i 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 varianoa request under oon5ideration is the minimum necessary;
S. I'he Board also proposesthe following conditions:
a)
b)
c) Adherence to the items owfined in the follow-up letter sent with,this resolution
BAON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I I E A MOTION IC)AVPRQ�ffi LQENY AREAVARIANCE N0.
,Z-AV-10-2017, Mary Sotanski, Jntro,&=,d by who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted time 15":' day of February 2017 by tine fol low in vote:
AYES,
NOES:
Town of Queensbury, Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department to Notes
,Area Variance No.: 9-2017
Project Applicant: DKC Holdings,Inc.
Project JAC26011: 63 IffiRois Avenue
SEQR Type 11
Meeting Date. Feb rua ry 1.5, 017
es r`:iptian of Proposed
Applicant proposes a lot line adjustment for two existing parcels, Parcel 309',9-1-30 existing is 12,000 sq. ft. and.
to be reduced to 7,500 sq. ft. Adjoining parce 13 09.9-1-29 cxi sti ng 3,000 sq, ft.to be increased to 7,500 sq. ft.
Relief requested for furtherance of a nonconf6rming lot.
Relief Req
The,applicant request relief'for furtherance of a nonoonforining lot in the Neigliborhood. Residential Zone.
Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts dimensional rwu nt f mm
'R
The applicant proposes a lot line adjustment to create a 7,500 sq ft parcel where 0.5 ac is required for lots that do
not have access to sewer and water-site has-access to water.
criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town lGaw;
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 as the lots are being adjusted for size to create lots that
have enough room to place a home�and.utilities.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can he athieved by some method, feasible for time applicant
to pursue, other than an area vartance. Feasible alternatives may be limited due to the size of the existing
parcels where one lot is becoming more conforming: but both parcels, will be undersized for the Toning
requirem"m
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderat:e.
Parcel 309.9-1-30 is 12,000 sq ft and being reduced to 7,500 sq ft where 0.5 ac (21, 780 sq ft). Relief requested
is 1.4,280 sq 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. Whether the alleged difiriculty wits self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
staff r~a�trmar►ts:
'I"he applicant proposes a Oct line adjustment between two pap-Qek where Parcel 309,9-1-30 will be rediAced from
12,000 to 7,500 sq ft. The applicant proposes to have two,pai-Qds at 7,500 sq ft,to accommodate two new homes.
. ..........—
Pamel.Historr " (cn st ruction/site plan/variance,etcl. j.
P346 yr. 19btu mobile home
Zon'!'nV--- Board of Apmeals
I*,
Community Development DepcOment Staff Notes
Zonfng Board of Appeals— Record of Resotution
'Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
Area Varianace Resolution To: Approve/Disapprove
Applicant Name: DKC Holdings,,Inc.
File Natuber: Z-A'V-9-2017
Location: 63 Illinois Avenue
Tax Map Number: 309.9-1-30 and 2.9
ZJ3A Meeting Date: Wednesday, February 15, b17
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has,received, an application from DKC Holding$,Inc.
Applicant proposes a lot ]in(-,a4justment for two existing parcels. Parcel 3O9.9-1-30 existing is 12,000 sq. ft, and to be
.reduced to 7,500 sq. ft. Adjoining parcel 309.9-1-29 existing 3,000 sq. ft. to be increased to 7,500 sq. ft. Relief requested
for fartherance of a nonconforming lot.
The applicant request relief for f-urthoranee of a noncanfortning lot it the Neighborhood Residential Zone.
Soption 179-3-040 establishment of districts dimensional requirements,'for NR
The applicant proposes a lot liii.e adjustinent to,create a 7,500 sq, & parcel where 0.5 aQ is required for lots that do not
have aocess to sewer and water—site:has access to water.
SE-QR Type 11 —no further review required;
.A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, FebruaEy 15, 201,71 ;
Upon review of the application materials, infonnation supplied during the public hearing, and upon oonsideration of the
r,riter ia.sped fied in Sedion 179-14-08O of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 26 7 of NY S Town Law and after
discussion and deliberation,we fi nd as fol lows.
PER ,rim DRAFT1)W)V11),ED HN STMT
1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the, character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties
because
2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered b�y the Board, tire reasonah
ble and. avebeen.inc ude
L_A
tp ni i n in:i,j Kqjhqgqq�mg OR are not Possible.
3. The requested variance is/is not substantial because
4. There is js not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood,or districts'
5. Is,the alleged,diffiicuttis/is,not self-created because
6. In addition the Board finds that, the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would Gutwei h
_2MjAj6jhed by (denial) the resulting detriment to the litalth, saftly and welfare of the
neighborhood or community;
7. The Board,also Finds that:the variance request under consideration is,the minimum necessary;
The Board also proposes flie following conditions-
a)
G) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution.
.BAED ON THE ABO VE ENDINGS. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / �, -
9-2017, DKC Holdings, Inc., Introduced by who moved for its,adv tion, seconded by
Daly adopted,this 15'h day of February 2017 by the following vow—
AYE&
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Com m unity Development De pa rtment Staff Notes
Area Variance No., 1 1-2017
Project Applicant: Stephen & Caryn LA Fleche
Project Location: 12 Waters Edge Drive
SrMR Type- T'Ype'11
Meeting Date: Februai-y 15,2017
of Proposed
Applicant proposes to renovate a 697 sq. ft. floor area portion o°f the second floor of an existing iiome. The new
construction on the northeast side and shoreline does not meet the required setbacks. Relief requested fi-orn
minimum setback requirements for the WR,zoning district. Planning Board. Site Plan Review required for
expansion of a nonconforming structure in a.Critical Environmental Area.
Relief Req tdre
The applicant request relief from minimum setback reqWternents for the WR zoning district.
Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts dimensional requirements
The applicant proposes to renovate a second floor area of an existing home, The,new construction area is to be
697 sq. ft. where proposed to be 29.5 ft. from the shoreline where a 50 ft, set back is required an 8.1 ft. from the
east side property line where a 15 setback is required.
Cr,iterua for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 ofT'owrn Lair:
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 to no impacts to the
neighborhood may be anticipated.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can he achieved by some Fnethod, feasible for the applicant
to pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered limited due to the design.of
the home and location on the site,
3. Whether the requested area valiance is substantial. The rel ief requested mai be considered moderate
relevant to the code. Relief is requested for shoreline of 20.5 ft. and 6.9 ft. for the east property line.
4. Wbetber the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental
conditions in (lie neig'h borbood or district., Minor,to no i in pact to the physical or environmental conditions
in the neighborhood rtiay bf,anticipated.
Whether the alkged difficulty was,self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created
staff c"OMM
Applicant proposes to renovate the second floor of an existing home. Floor area existing on second floor is 474 sq.
ft. and existin garage storage is 232 sq. ft. Proposed secand,floor with addition(3 6+/- ft. x 5 +/- ft.)is 697 sq. ft.
with removal of floor area,storage above garage. The 2nd floor addition allows for 2nd floor bedroom expansion
and I st floor bedroom expansion—total 3 bedrooms. Project inc tudes,site work to instal I permeable pavers.
Parcel History (construction/site planlvariance,
BP 201.0-55 3 Boathouse; BP 2010-539 Derno of Boathouse; BP 2009-13 5 Septic Alt.; BP 21108-567 Res, Alt,
Zoning Board OT" Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Zoning Board of Appeals–Record of Resolution
Torn of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
Town arQyVaaqbt1jy
Area.Variance Resolution To. Approve / Disapprove
Applicant Name: Stephen, & Caryn LaFleche
File Number: Z-AV-1 1-2017
Location-, 12 Waters Edge Drive
Tax Map Number: 22T17-1-29
Z13A Meeting Date- Wednesday, February 15, 2017
The tonin. Board of Appeals of the T own of Queensbury has received an application 1rom Stephen & Caryn
LaFleclie. Applicant proposes to renovate a 697 sq, ft. floor area portion of the second floor of an existing 110111e. The
new construction on the narthoast side and shoreline does,not mea the required setbacks. Relief requested from minimurn
setback requirements,for the WR zoning district. Planning Board- Site Plan.Review required for expansion of a
no,riconforming structure in a Critical Environmental Area.
The applicant request relief from minimum setback requirements for the WR zoning district.
1 17,9-3
SeptiQ -040 establishment of districtsclim 'wsiunlreuireients
The applicant proposes to renovate second floor arcaof an existing home. The new construction area is to be 697sq., ft.
where proposed to be 295 ft. from the shoreline where a 50,ft. set back is required an 8,J ft. from the east side property
line wliere a 15 setback is required.
SEQR Type Il –no further review required;
Aublic hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday Februa
P L Nua,Ly 115. 2017-
Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during -the public hearing, and upon
consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-O'SO(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267
of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as, follows:
PU-'X TIAE Dl' l�"TPROVIDED BY STAH
1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby
properties because
2. Fmsible alternatives are and r have been considered by the Board, are: reasonable and have been
o
included t ,minimizethereqmst OR are not possib—IcL
3. The requested variance isms' is not substantial because
4, There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditins in the neighborhood or
district?
5. Is 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
o Law ,LiLaMKUaD / would be outwgighed, b �kl) the resulting detriment to the health, safety and,
;jL _y Ld -L
welfare of the neighborhood or community;
7� The Board also finds,that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
8. The Board also proposes the follolAing conditions-
a)
c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution.
BASED, ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTIQNITO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANC
NO. '- -1,1-2017 Stephen & CM.n LaFleche, Introduced by _, who moved for its adoption, seconded
by
Duly ado,pted,this 15"' day of February 017 by the following vote-
AYES:
NOES-
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board, of Appeals
Community IDevelopme�nt Department ' taff Notes
Area Variance No.- 7- 17
Pro I ect Applicant: Sharlene Morehouse
J
Project Location: 497 Sherman Avenue
Meeting Date. February 15, 201.7
SEQR Type: Type 11
ion of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes construction of a 150 sq. ft. residential addition(dining,room) to an existing 1,080 sq.
ft. home. Ilic project:includes a 120 sq, ft, portion, of the dining area that is ex Laing a�nd to berern.oved,
then reconstructed with a 30 sq. ft. addition, new footprint—630 sq. ft. Relief requested from minimum
setback requirements fbr the MD zoning district.
Relief Reg
I'he applicant request relief from the minimum setback requirements for the MDR zoning district.
Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts dimensional requirements
The applicant proposes to remove an existing dining room area to construct a new dining area addition to
an existing hoiire. 'The single story addition is to be no closer to the property line than the original 7.8 ft.
where a 25 ft. setback 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. Minot
impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. The applicant has indicated the home has been.
through renovations.
2. Whethe!r 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 as the
existing home is,noncompliant for setbacks.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested for setback may be
considered substantial relevant to the code where: 7.8 ft. is proposed.and the relief is for 17.2 ft.
4, Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the: neighborhood or district. The project as 'proposed may be
considered to,have minimal impact on the environrnental conditions of the site or area.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self'-created.
Staff cow
The applicant proposes to remove a 120 sq. fl. dining roorn area and to construct a 150 sq. ft. addition.
The:applicant has explained the existing dining area is not able to be repaired and the new construction
would include the same area and to construct 3sq. ft,. of new area.
Parcel History (Construct onsite,plan/variance, etc.
BP 2008-31,3 Res. Addition; BP 2004-240 2-cu det. Garage; BP 95-384 above gqound pool; J3)P 89-622
,Alterations; AV53-2008
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department to Notes
Zoning Board of Appeals —Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 7421 a Road Queeilsbury, NY 12804 (518) 76'1-8238
QW,
,rf)LVJI (fQpLnh'Ij'jjry
A:reit Variance Resolution To: Approve/Disapprove
Applicant Name: Sharlene Morehouse
File Number: Z- V-7-21117
Location: 497 Sherman Avenue
Tax Map Number: 308,8-2-12
ZHA Meeting Date: Wednesday, February 15, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Sharlene
Morehouse. Applicant proposes construction of al 50 sq. ft. residential addition (dining room) to an existing
1,0810 sq, I home. The project includes a 120 sq. ft. portion, of the dining area that is existing and to be
removed, then reconstructed with a 30 sq. f1 addition, new footprint—630 sq. I Relief requested from
minimum setback requirements for the MDzoning district.
The applicant request relief from the minimum setback requirements for the MDR zoning district.
Section. 179-3-040 establishment of districts dimensional muirement
The applicant proposes to remove an existing dining room area to construct new dining area addition to an
existing home. The single story addition is to be no closer to the property line than the original 7.8 ft. wherea
25, ft. setback is required.
SEQR Type ll —no further review required;
A public hearing,was,advertised and he on Wednesday, February 15, 2017
Upon review of the application, materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon
consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-1.4-080(A) ofthe Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267
ouNysTown.Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as fbllows.
A,1 , ;I
["E"R"1'14 E DRAT" ' 1-1 RO V 11) D B Y' �'TA IF'
1. There is / is not an, undesirable chm ige in the character of the, neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby
properties because
2. Feasible alternatives #re and have been considered by the Board, tire reasonable and have been
included to minimize the request OR are Halt o,ssibje.
3. The requested variance is /is,not substantial because
4. There is / is not an. adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or
distric�T---'-
5. Is the alleged difficulty is /is not self-cxeated because
6. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would
outweigh tat�®_ "I'll", al), / would be out.weWjqd -�y fdeniall the iesulting detriment to the health, safety and
welfare ofthe neighborhood or community;
7. The Board also finds that the variance request cruder consideration is the minimum necessary;
8. The Board also proposes the following,oonditions..
a)
b)
c) Adherence to the iteins outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution.
BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE
NO. Z-AV-7-2017, Sharlene Morehouse, Introduced by_, who moved for its adoption,
seconded by
Duty adopted this 15"h day of February 2017 by the following vote:
AYES-
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department to Notes
Area Variance No.: AV 6-2017
Project Applicant: Michael Kaidas
Project Location- 119 Seelye Road
SEType: Type 11
Meeting Date: February 14,2017
IDescription of Propose
Applicant proposes demolition of 1,345 sq. ft. wood frame home and to leave the stone fireplace. The
project involves a lot line adjustment with the adj oining lot; 119 eel 'e Road existing lot size is 0.93
acres and will be reduced to U9 acres. The new lot line places the stone fireplace on parcel 227.17-1-49
(113 Seelye Road)where the lot size is 0.93 acres and will be increased to 0.96 acres. Relief requested
ftom minimum lot size requirements for the WRzonirig district,,
Relief Req
The applicant request the following relief: Relief requested from minimum lot size requirements for the
WR zoning district.
Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts dimensional requirements,— Waterfront Residential Zone -
T
The applicant proposes,a lot line adjust so parcel 119 Seelye Rd parcel ,'x.17-1- C1 will 'be reduced from
0.93 ac to 0.89 ac where 2 ac is reqpired.
FCriteria, for considering an Area Variance according to Ch2gter 267 of Town
In ruaking a, determination, the board shall consider.
'I. Whether an andesirable change will be produced in the character ofthe 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. The lot line adjustments include a renioval of an
existing home that was located close to the shoreline.
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
size of the existing parcels where one lot is beraringmore conforming but both parcels will be
undersized for the zoning requirements.
4. Whether the requested area variance,is substantial. The relief requested may be considered
substantial relevant to the code. Parcel 227.17-1-50 is 0.93 and,being reduced to 0.8,9 where 2 ac is
required. Relief requested is 1.11 ac.
Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighb,orhood or district. The project as proposed will lave
minimal impact to the neighborhood.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created
Staff conim.011tv
J
The applicant proposes the lot line adjustment withtwo site improvements that include reirnoval of a 1,345
sq. ft. carnp and to, construct an open sided pavilion to maintain.the stone fire place. The project is part of'
,a lot, line adjustment to adjoining property that includes the construction of the open sided pavilion,
Parc6l History (construction/site plan/variance, etc.y
J
-AV- -2017 (gazebo and lot line adjustment)
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Zoning Board of Appeals-1 ecord of Resolution
Town of Queen sbury '742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518), 761-8238
TO vn d(tr!een'V&rry
Area Variance Resolution TG. Approve/ Disapprove
Applicant Name: Michael Kaidas
File Number: Z-A�V-6-2047
Location-. 11,9 Seelye Road
Tax Map, Now, ber: 227.17-1-50
ZBA Meeting Date. Wednesday, February 15, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Michael Kajdas.
Applicant proposes demolition of 1,345 sq. ft. wood fi-ame home and to leave the stone fireplace. The project
involves a lot line adjustment with the adjoining lot; 119 Seelye Road existing lot sit, is 0.93 acres and will be:
reduced to 0.89 acres. The new lot line places the stone fireplace on parcel 227.17-1-49 (113 Seel.ye Road)
where the lot size is 0.,93 acres and will be increased to 0.96 acres. Relief requested fi-om minimum lot size
requirements for the WR,zoning district.
The applicant request the following relief. Relief requested from minimum lot size requirements for the WR
zoning district.
Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts dimensional requirements, - Water.ftont Residential Zone -WR
The applicant proposes a lot line adjust so parcel '119 Seelye Rd parcel ,227.17-1-510,will be reduced, from 0.93
ac to 0.89 ac where 2 ac is required,
SEQR Type 1'1 -,no farther review required;
A public heating was advertised and, held, on Wednesday, February 15, 2017;
Upon review of the application materials, information, supplied during the public hearing, and upon,
consideration of the criteria speoified in Section 179-14- 0�( ) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267
of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows:
I-'IER THE' DIZA F7F PROVIDED BYSTAP.[.'
1. There is / is not an undesirable change in, the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby
properties because
2, Feasible alternatives are. and, have been considered, by the Board, are reasonable and have been
included to minimize the request OR are not.pqssible.
3. The requested variance is /is not substantial because
4. There is, I is no an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or
district?
5, is 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
outwei 1h a royal)) would be otitweighed Lb (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 minit-num 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 ON THE ABOVE FINDrNGS,, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE
NO. Z-AV-6-2017 Michael Kaidas, Introduced by 1. who inoved, for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 15Th' day of February 2017 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance,No.. AV 5�-2017
Project Applicant: Michael KAridas
Project Location: 113 Seelye Road
SEQ R Type4 Type 11
Meeting Date: February 15,2417
Description of Proposed Pro,jectr
Applicant proposes construction of a 250 sq. ft. open gazebo utilizing the existing stone fireplace. The project
involves a lot line adjustment with the adjoining lot; 11eelye, Road existing lot size is 0.93 acres and will be
reduced to 0.89 acres. The new lot line places the stone fireplace on parcel 227.17-149 (113 Seelye Road)where
the lot size is 0.93 acres and will. be increased to 0.96 acres, Relief requested from minimum setback requirements
R)r the gazebo, in the WR zoning district.
Relief Required
"Phe applicant request relief from minimum setback requirements for the,gazebo in the WR zoning district.
Section 179-34040 establishment of districts dimensional mauirements,--"Waterfront Residential Zone—WR,
Section 179-5-020 accessory structures
The applicant proposes a 250 sq. ft. open gazebo that is to be located 5 ft., from the south property line where,20 ft,
is,required and 29 ft. from the shoreline where a 75 sdetback is required.
Criteria for consideriogsun Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town ind
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
neighborliood inay be anticipated. The pavilion area is smaller than, the previous structure located in the same
area.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by soniemetbod, feasible for the applicant
to pursue,other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be:possible to locate in a compliant
location,however the applicant intends to utilize the stone fireplace from the pmvious structum due to the
uniqueyne,ss of stone built rim place.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief may be wnsidored substantial relevant to
the code. The side, setback relief is 1,5 ft. and the shoreline relief is 461
4. Whether the propoml variance will have an, adverse eff"t or impact on the physical or environmental
conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project as proposed will have minimal impact to the
neighborhood.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty inay be considered self-created.,
Staff conim
The applicant!proposes, to construot an open sided pavilion to maintain a stone fire place. The project, is part of a
lot line adjust cent to adjoining property that includes the rernoval of an existing structure near the shoreline.
creel)E )ry(const ruction/sIte pis n1varia
Z-AV-6-2017 (lot line adjustment)
A
Zoning Board of Appeals
V
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Zoning Board of Appeals— Record of Resolution
Town of Queenshury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804, (518) 761-5231
'rowil
Area Variance Resolution To. Approve / Disapprove
Applicant Name: Michael Kaidas
File Number,: Z-AV-51-2017
Location- 11eelye Road
Tax Map Number- 227.17-1-49
ZBA Meeting Date: Wednesday, February 15, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Michael Kaidas,
Applicant proposes construction of a 2,50 sq. ft. open gazebo 11filrizing the existing stone fireplace. The project involves a
lot:line adjustment with the adjoining lot; 11.9 Seelye Road existing lot size is 0.93 acres and, will be reduced,to 0.89 acres.
The view lot line places the stone fireplace on Wircel 227.17-1-49 (113 Se:elye Road)where the lot:size is,O. a0res and
will be increas0 to 0.96 acres. Relief requested from minimum setback requirements for the gazebo, in the WR zoning
district.
The applicant request relief from rniniinui,,n setback require=,nts for the gazebo in the WR,70 ngdistricL
Section 179-3-040 Rgqa
b�§ hrne �of Ire intern —'q aterfront ResidenZo —W
tial ne R. Section 179-
5-020 agoess,gy,structures
The applicant proposes a 250 sq, ft. open, gazebo,that is to he located 5 ft, from the south property line where 2,0 ft. is
required and 29 ft. from the shoreline where a 75r setback is,required.
SEQR Type I1 — no further review required;
,A public hearing was advertised and, held on Wednesday. Feb ruM_1 5, 2 01.7;
Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public heating, and upon
consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town. Code and Chapter 267
ofNY'S Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as .follows:
PER'11711' [)[WPTIIR0,VIDE,D BY SI-AT"I,
1. There is / is not an, undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood not a detriment to nearby
properties because
2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board,, are reasonable and have been
included to nAnimize the KNuest OR are notpossil le.
,
3. The requested variance is / is"not.substantial because
4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood, or
district'?
5. Is the alleged difficulty jq,/is not.self-created because
6. In addition the Board finds that the bene it to the applicant ftom granting the requested variance %votild
outweigh (approval), / would be outWqjghqd by,,,.(klnLk1) the resulting detriment to the health,, safety and
welfare of the neighborhood or community;
T The Board also finds that the variance request under eon siderati on is the mirijrnurn necessary;
8. The Board also proposes the l"ollowin, conditions-
a)
b)
c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution.
BASED ON TIDE ABOVE, FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / QF NY AREA VARIANCE
NO. Z-AV-5-2017, M.ic.hael I"Wdas, Introduced by who moved f6r its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 1,51h day of February 201 y the following vote:
AYES-
NOES: