Staff Notes Packet for ZBA Wed., April 26, 2017 Staff Notes
Includes Agenda, Draft BA Resolutions
BA Meeting
Wednesday, April 26, 2017
Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda
Meeting: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 Time: 7:00 -11:00 pm
Queensbury Activities Center-74213iziy Road
Agenda subject to change and may be found at. www.queensbury.riel
NEW BUSINESS,
A Iicant s Stevwz&s Shops corp.(Chris Potter) Area Variance No Z-AV-26-2017
Owners stews d's Shops Corp- SEQRAT a IF
A ants &a Lot Size 1.72 acres
Location 977 State Route 149;noF%M%vV corner of Zoning N
Ward No. Route 149 and Ridge Road 9L • Ward 1
Tea€[d No 266.03-1-11 Seetion 179-3-041), 179-4-030
CrMS Ref i'-SP-30-2017 Warren County Planning Mil 2017
Public HeRring Aril 26,2017 Adironduck Park A n ALD
Freject Deserlpttan: Applicant proposes demolition of existing 2,292 sq,ft convenience store with fuel pumps and construction Ufa new
3,695 sq. ft.convenience store with a 2,360 sq. ft.canopy to have 4 fuel islands for a total of 8 fueling stations. Rclicfmquestod from
minimum setback requirements and from the Travel Corridor Overlay setback mquirerraenls_ PlaTm itkg Board, Site Plan Review for nes.'
r,"VerienCe Store With CUM SerViCe_
A lican s Robert Fulmer Arca Vorianec leo Z-A'V-29-2017
O►sn e s Robert Fulmer Sl; RA Type 11
Agent(s) rVa Lot Size 3.2 acres _
Location 54 Country Club Road(Country Club Manor) Zoning MDR
Ward No, Ward 2
Tax Id No 294.14-1-49 -section 179-5-020
Crass Ref P-SP-31-2017;P-FWW 3-2017;BP 2007-084 Warren County Planning April 2017
2-car att_C,er_fres.add_
Public Hearing Aril 26.2017 Adirondack ParkAgency FVa
Project Deseription: Applicant proposes construction of a 1,100 sq. ft.3-door detached garage. Relief requested for a second garage.
Planning Board; Site Plan Review and Freshwater Wetlands review required for site work within 104 ft,of a wetland.
Applicant(s) Gregory Ttmsi,Member hark Bay Fropertios Area Variance No Z-AV-31-2017
Owners Lawrence Davis SRr RA Tyeo II
A ants 3,Upper, Esq,BPSR f Hutchins Engineering Lot Size 1-5 acres&0.23 acres
Location 3300 State Route 9L Zoning WR
Ward No. Ward I
Tax Rd No 239_l8-]-27.1;239.13-1-27.2 Section 179-4-040
Cross lief P-sP-33-2017 'Warren Coun Mnaing Aril 2017
Public Henring J A iii 26,2017 Adirondack Parl[Agency ALD
Project Description: Applicant proposes a boundary lot line adjustment to construct a single family home with a shaved
curbcut with the adjacent parcel_ Parcel 2.39.19-1-27.1 will reduce a 1_5 ac parcel to 0.91 ac and increase parcel 239.18-27.2
to 0.81 ac. Project also involves construction of single on parcel 239,19-1-27,2 and associated site work on both
parcels_ Rel iefrcquested for increasing the nonconformity of an existing non-conforming parcel. Relief is also requested for
stormwater device s0bacl€_ Planni ng Board:construction of single fam ily home wi thin 50#t_of 15%slopes and stormwater
for slopes and location in a CEA.
Page 1 of 2
Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda
Meeting: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 Time; 7LO -11;00 prn
Cveensbury Activ€ties Center—742 Bay Road
Agenda subject to change and may be found at: www,queensbury_net
A liesn 8 Hudson Headwaters Health Network Sip nVariance No L-SV-4-2017
Owner(s) Hudson Headwaters Health Network SE RA Type Unlisted
A n s Richard E.Jones Associates Lot Size 2.16 aercs and 6,9 aures
Location 9 Carey Road, 161 Carey Road. Zoning CLI
Ward leo. 151 Carey Road Ward 4 _
Tex 1d No 308,16-2-2.3;309.13-2-31.2 Section Chapter 140
Crass Ref SPR 52-14A;SPR 52-14;S?X 61-2013;Silk Wa.rmn County Planning April 2417
45-2013;SPR 45-2010;SPR 47-2007;Sign
Pits noted as Bldg Permits BP 2011-627;
BP 2011-626;BP 2411-625;BP 2409-210
Public Eica ring Aril 26 2017 Adirondack Park# enq n1a
ProiectDescriptiork: Applicant proposes multiple on-site signs: On parcel 309.13-2-31.2 the main free standing sign is
proposed greater than 45 sq. ft. Additionally two free standing signs are proposed on the same parcel to be located at the east
entrances on Carey Rd for Building direction. The entrance signs do not meet the required 15 ft.setback.Then on parcel
308.16-2-2.3 administration site one free stottiding is to be 24 sq.ft. and less than 15 it, setback.Relief requested fur size of
free standing sign and setback for free standing and entrance signage. Rel ie f also requested for number of freestanding signs.
A licant fi TeudyNuesi Area Vrrrianee No Z-AV-22-2017
Owners Tcudy Nucsi SLQ14,'.1�ve if
A ant s nfa Lot Site 0.58 acres
Location 0Hidden Hills Zoning MDR
Ward No- Ward4
Tflx Id No 302.13-1-16 Section 179-5-070
Crws;Rrf r31d&Permit AST-I-2417 carport addition; WHrren County Plawliing April 2017
Area Variance No. 12-2015 Fence
Public B caring April 26,201-1 AdirondatckPark Agency 1111a
Project Description: Applicant proposes constructi-on o f a 216 sq ft carport addition on the south side ofthe hoine, The
project is an open earpurt and includes expansion of the driveway area of about 75 sq fl_Rel ief requested from mi n irn um
setback requirements of the MDR wning district.
A4 Beant s Sic hen Carol&AndnawBodette Arta Variance No Z-AV-13-2017
Owns a) l&Andrew Bodam SEQRAT o 11
Agea&sj Curtis D.Rybas Lot S1xe 0,24 acres
Location 10Hernloelcltpad Zoning WR-LA
Ward Nu. Ward 1
Tax Yd No 289.10-1-32 Seetlon 174-3-0A4: 174-13-410
CrossRef BOH Septic Variance Warrork.CoLkAty Plannin n1a
Public Hearin A rit 26 2017 Adirondack Pork Agency oda
Pro3eet Description: Applicant proposes a second floor renovation removing existing 572 sq.ft.and constructing proposed 570 sq.ft.
second floor with office area and master bedroom. New construction does not meet shoreline setback and expansion nonconforming,
Praaect includes an ex isting porch renovation 98+1-sq. ft.for new entyway and open porch. Relief request from minimum setback and
FAR requirements. Planning Board shall provide a r000mmcndation to tho Zoning Board ofAppeals. Planning Board: Pursuant to Chapter
179-13-410& 179-3-040 o6the Zotling Crdinanoe,expansion In a CEA shall be subject io PlIvii ing Board review and approval.
Any fu rther business that tike Ohainnart Bete rmines may be Vmperly brouolkt before the Zo ming Board of Appeals.
Final Version Agenda; 4,03,2017 CB LM/sh
Page 2 of 2
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No.. 26-2017
Project Applicant: Stewart's Shops Corp.
Project Location: 977 State Route 149
Parcel History: P-SP NW017
SEQR Type- T Ypc 11
Meeting date: April 26,2017
Description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes demolition of existing 2,292 sq. ft. convenience store with fuel pumps and construction of a new
3,695 sq. ft. convenience store with a 2,360 sq. ft. canopy to have 4 fuel islands for ar total of 8 fueling stations. Relief
requested from minimum setback requirements and from the Travel Corridor Overlay setback requirements. Planning
Board: Site Plan Review for new convenience store with fuel service_
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief from setbacks in the NC zone (Neighborhood Cominerciel).
Section 179-1-030 travel corridor overlay—Route 149
The applicant proposes a 44 ft setback where a 75 ft setback is required for the canopy—on Route 149.
Section 179-3-040 estab I i shment ofdistricts-dimensional requirements NC zone
The applicant proposes a 27 ft setback where a 40 ft setback is required for the canopy--on Midge Rd.
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 grain Oing of#his area variance. Minor impacts to the neighborhood may
be anticipated.
. 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 for location of the building,
septic area amd canopy as the parcel is on a corner having two front setbacks
3. Whether the req nested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to
the code. The applicant requests the Route 149 relief for 31 ft and for the Ridge lid relief for 13 ft.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental
conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or environmental conditions in the
neighborhood may be anticipated.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Staff Comments
The applicant proposes to construct a new convenience store and a new feel canopy station. Tho project includes the
placement of the building and canopy to face the intersection of Route 149 and Ridge Rd. The new building is to have 29
parking spaces at the building ama with 8 fueling positions under the canopy. The applicant has indicated the traffic flow
arrangement would allow for the tourist traffic flaw for the area. The project activities disturb more than I ac and the
applicant has completed a stormwater pollution prevention plan that is under review and comment by the Town
designated engineer. The plans show the building to be 23 ft 4 in height. Than calor scheme to be elapbuard cobble stone
with white column and fascia features and a stone veneer base.
Zoning Board of Appeals —Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
Tosco of(IFensbury
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve 'Disapprove
Applicant Name: Stewart's Shops Corp.
File Number: -A -26-2017
Location. 977 State Route 149
Tax Map Number: 266.03-1-11
BA Meeting Date: Wednesday, April 2 , 2017
The Zoning Boaxd of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Stewart's Shops
Corp. Applicant proposes demolition of existing 2,2.92 sq. ft. co-avenience store with fuel pumps and
construction of a new 3,695 sq. ft. convenience store with a 2,360 sq. ft. canopy to have 4 fuel islands for a
total of 8 fueling stations. Relief requested from minimum setback requirements and from the Travel Corridor
Overlay setback requirements. Planning Board: Site Plan Review for new convenience store with fuel service.
The applicant requests relief from setbacks in the NC zone (Neighborhood Commercial).
Section 179-4-030 travel corridor overlay—Route 149
The applicant proposes a 44 ft setback where a 75 ft setback is required for the canopy—on Route 149.
Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts-dimensional requirements NQ zone
The applicant proposes a 27 ft setback where a 40 ft setback is required for the canopy —on Ridge Rd.
SEAR Type II—no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, April 26, 2017;
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. There is 1_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 Old are not possible.
3. The requested variance is 1 isnot substantial because
4. There is 1 is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or
district's
Page 1 of 2
5. Is the alleged difficulty is / is not self-created because
In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would
oatwei a royal 1 would be outwei hed b denial the resulting detriment to the health, safety and
welfare of the neighborhood or community;
7. The Bomrd also finds that the varianec request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS. i MAKE A M T10N TO APPROVE/DEFY AREA VARJANCE
A - 6-2017 Stewart's Shops Cm. (Chris Potter), Introduced by who moved for its adoption,
seconded by
Duly adopted this 26"' day of April 2017 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Page 2 of 2
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of appeals
Community Development Department Staff dotes
Area Variance No.: 29-2017
Project Applicant: Robert Fulmcr
Project Location: 54 Country Club Road
Parcel. History- F- P-31-2017; P-FWW 3-2017; BP 2007-0842,-car att. G rdres. add.
SF.QR Type: Typc 11
Meeting Datc: April 26, 2017
Description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes construction of a 1.100 sq. ft. 3-door detached garage. Re for a second garage.
Planning Board: Site Plan Review and Freshwater Wet] review required for site work within 100 ft, of a
wetland.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for a second garage.
Section 179-5-020—Accessary Structures—gg4
The applicant proposes a second garage that is detached.
Criteria for considering an Arca Variance according to C'hapteri 267 of')i'o�vn 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 he 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
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, other than an area ►variance. The feasible alternatives may be limited as the
applicant would like to use the building for storage of lave equipment and recreational vehicles-
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief may be considered substantial relevant to
the code. kelief is requested for second garage where only one garage is allowed.
4, Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project as proposed may be considered
to have minimal to no impact on the environmental conditions of the site oi•area,
§. Whether the alleged diffieufty was self-created_ The project as proposed may be considered self-created,
staff cornmcnts:
The plans show the garage to have, 3-garage doors and an open floor plan. The garage is to be 20 +l- 11 in
Height. The applicant has indicated there will be ric stairs or pull down stairs and the rear of the building is to be
the saine as the front without doors. There is to be a znandoor on the south side of the building.
Zoning Board of Appeals —Record of Resolution
Tov+n of Qucensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-11238
Town of CLcheasbmry
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve 1 Disapprove
Applicant Marne: Robert Fulmer
)File Number: AV-29-2017
Evocation: 54 Country Club Road
Tax Map Number: 296A4-1-49
ZIRA Meeting Date: April 26, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Robert Fulmer.
Applicant proposes construction of 1,100 sq. ft. 3-door detached garage. Relief requested for a second garage.
Planning Board: Site Plan Review and Freshwater Wetlands review required for site work within tQ0 ft. of a
wetland.
The applicant requests relief for a second garage.
Section 179-5-020 —Accesa2a Structures—garage
The applicant proposes a second garage that is detached.
SEAR Type II —no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, April 2 6, 2017;
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. There is � is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detilnient 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 possible.
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 is / is not self-created because
Page 1 o[2.
. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would
outweigh ppmval) 1 would be oigweighed b dcnial the resulting detriment to the health, safety and
welfare of the, neighborhood ox community;
7. The Board also finds that the variance request raider consideration is the minimum necessary;
S. The Board also proposes the following conditions;
a)
b)
c) Adhci nce to the items outlincd in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution.
BASED ON THE ABOVE FIND rN S. I MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE 1 DENY AREA VARIANCE
Z-AV Robert Fulmer, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 26th days of Apri12 017 by the following vote:
AYES
NOES:
Pageof
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Developmeni.Department Staff Noies
Area Variance Na.: 3I-2017
Project Applicant: Grcgnry Teresi,Dark Bay Properties
Project Location: 3300 State Route 9L
Parcel Ifis#ory: F-SP 33-2017
Elly Type: Type II
meeti rig Date: April 26, 2017
Deseription of Proposed Project;
Applicant proposes a boundary lot line adjustment to construct a single family home with a shared curbcut with
the adjacent parcel. Parcel 239.18-1-27,1 will reduce a 1.5 ac parcel to 1.0 ac and increase parcel 239.18-27.2 to
0.80 ac. Project also involves construction of single on parcel 239.18-1-27.2 and associated site work on both
parcels. Relief requested for increasing the nonconformity of an existing nonconforming parcel. Relief is also
requested for starrnwater device setback. Plamnlrrg Board: construction of single family Koine vyithin 50 ft. of
15% slopes anal stomiwater for slopes and location in a CEA,
Relief Reyrrired•
The applicant requests relief for installation of slormwater devices less than 100 ft. from the septic and further
reduction of a rron-con Comi ing parcel. Parcel is located in the WR zone.
Section 147-11 Stormwater Management Supplementary additional requirements for projects within Lake George Park
The applicant propanes storm ager infihration devices closer than 100 ft to the septic area where 22 ft is proposed.
179-3-040 Establishment of Districts -dimensional re uirement WR zone
The project proposes to reduce a non conforming parcel from 1.5 ac to 1.0 ac where 2 ac is required.
Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Lave:
In making a detcrwination, the board shall consider:
1, Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment
to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor to no impacts to the
neighborhood may be anticipated.
. Whether the benefit sought by tht- applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, ether than an area varia nee. Feasible alternatives may be limited due to the lot
configuration along the shoreline and the neighboring properly request for the proposed hoine to be located
as described on the parcel,
. Whethcr the requested area variance is substantial. The relief may be considered substantial relevant to
the code. The relief requested is 79 ft.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self created. The difflcWty may be considered self created.
Staff comments:
The project includes a lot line adjustment between two existing parcels where both parcels are to be non
conforming parcels. The plans show the new home will have on site septic and a lake drawn water lire. Other
utilities will be communications and electric will be provided from existing connections. The plans also show
the septic and lake drawn drinking water location for the adjoining lot. The plans show extensive grading where
the new home will be located that extends to the adjoining lot. The project area for the new home shows a
vegetation plan for the east side of the home including white pine, spruce and hemlock. The elevations shove a
28 ft in height building. The lake side area contains the walk out basement doors and above is an open deck
area.
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Motes
honing Board of Appeals —Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
Tome of(Lumeji.%bnry
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve 1 Disapprove
Applicant Name: Gregory Teresi, Dark Say Properties
File Number: Z.-AV-31-2017
Location- 3300 State Route 9L
Tax Map lumber. 239.18-1-27.1; 239.18-1-27.2
ZBA Meeting Daae. Wednesday, April 2 , 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Gregory TeresL
Darla Bay Properties. Applicant proposes a boundary lot line adjustment to construct a single family home with
a shared curbcut with the adjacent parcel. Parcel 239.18-1-27.1 will reduce a 1.5 ac parcel to 1.0 ac and
increase parcel 239.18-27.2. to 0.84 ac. Project also involves construction of single on parcel 239.18-1-27.2 and
associated site work on bath Parcels. Relief requested for increasing the nonconformity of an existing non-
conforming parcel. Relief is also requested for stormwateir device setback. Planting Board: construction of
single family home within 50 ft. of 15% slopes and stormwater for slopes and location in a CEA.
The applicant requests relief for installation of stormater devices less than 100 ft. from the septic and further
reduction of non-conforming parcel. Parcel is located in the SVR zone.
Section 147-11 Storrnwater ManaMment—Supplementary additional requirements for proaects within Lake Gear e� Park
The applicant proposes stormwater infiltration devices closer than 100 ft to the septic area where 22 ft is proposed,
179-3-040 Establishment of Districts—dimensional Mquirement.WR zone
The project proposes to reduce a non conforming parcel from 1.5 ac to 1.0 ac where 2 ac is required.
SEQR Type II— no further review required;
A. pablic hearing was advertised and heli on Wednesday, April 26, 2017;
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 Cotte and Chapter 2.67
of IVY'S Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows:
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 possibIc.
3, The requested variance is 1 is not substantial because
Page 1 of 2
4. There i 1 is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or
district?
5. Is the alleged difficult} is I is not self-created because
6, In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would
outweigh p oval) / would be outweighed by , denial the resulting detriment to the health, safety and
welfare of the neighborhood oT comm.unity;
7. The Board also finds that the variance request under 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 Witb this resolution.
BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE VE/ DENY AREA V.AMANCE -
AV-31-20 17,.Gregory Teresi, Member Dark Bay Properties, Introduced by who moved for its adaption,
seconded b
Duly adopted this 26h day of April 2017 by the Following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Page 2 of
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Sign Variana No.: 4-2017
Project Applicant: Hudson Headwater Health Network
Project Location: 9, 161 & 151 Carey Road
Parcel History: SPR 52-14A; SPR 52-14; SPR 61-2013; SPR 45-2013; SPR 45-2010; STAR 47-2007; Sign
Permits noted as Bldg Permi6 BP 2Q1.1-627; BP 2011-626; 1 P 2011-625; BP 2 009-2 10
SEAR Type: Unlisted
Meeting hate: April 26,2017
Description of Proposed Projee#:
Applicant proposes multiple on- site signs: On parcel 309,13-2-3 1.2 the main free standing sign is proposed
greater than 45 sq, ft. Additionally two free standing signs are proposed on the same parcel to be located at the
east entrances an Carey lid for building direction. The entrance signs do not meet the required 15 ft. setback.
Then on parcel 308.16- -2.3 administration site one free standing is to be 24 sq. ft. and less than 15 ft. setback.
Relief requested for size of free standing sign and setback for free standing and entrance signage. Relief also
requested for number of freestanding signs.
Relief Required•
The applicant requests relief for size of free standing sign and setback for free standing and entrance signage. Relief also
requested for number of freestanding signs.
Section 140-6 Signs for which permits are required
Parcel 309.13-2-31.2 Signage: Free standing Sign size proposed 84 sq ft where 45 sgft is the maximum allowed;
two entrance signs North and South to be located 1 ft from property line where a 15 ft setback is required—only
one free standing allowed per parcel and 3 are proposed.
Parcel 308.16- -2.3 Signage: The administration building proposes one free standing sign at 24 sq It to be
located at 4 ft from Corinth and 13 ft from Carey Rd where a 15 ft setback is required.
Criteria for considering a Sign 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 sign variance. Minor impacts to the
neighborhood may be anticipated as signs along the corridor are required to be compliant.
. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, other than a sign variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered to adjust the
number of signs and the size of signs.
3. Whether the requested sign variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered substantial
relevant to the code. The relief requested for the number of free standing signs is 3 and only 1 is allowed.
The relief for the size of the free standing sign is 39 sq ft greater than allowed. The relief requested for the
setbacks for the location signage is 14 ft and relief for the administrative sign is also 14 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 have minimal
impact on the environmental conditions of the district.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Staff cOmznents:
The applicant has explained the Hudson Headwaters I Iealth Network is proposing a new signage format for the
Currey Rd facilities to assist with directing custoniers to the correct buildings for services. There are additional
directional signage's proposed that are to be code compliant.
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Zoning Board of Appeals-Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
Torl+,i nFCLueeuslwry
Sign Variance k csulution To: Approve 1 Disapprove
Applicant Name: Hudson Heartwaters Health Network
File Number: V-4-2017
Location: 9 Care} Road, 161 Carey Road, 151 Carey Road
Tax Map Number: 308.16-2-2.3, 309.13-2-31.2
ZEA Meeting Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Hudson Headwater
Health Network for a variance from Chapter 140 of the Sign Code of The Town of Queensbury. Applicant
proposes multiple on-site signs: On parcel 309.13-2-31.2 the main freestanding sign is proposed greater than 45 sq.
ft. Additionally, two freestanding signs are proposed on the same parcel to be located at the east entrances on
Carey Rd for building direction. The entrance signs do not meet the required 15 ft. setback. Then on parcel 3 08,l6-
2-2.3 administration site one freestanding sign is to be 24 sq. ft. and less than 15 ft. setback.Relief requested for
size of freestanding sign and setback for freestanding and emtrance signage, Relief also requested for number of
freestanding signs.
The applicant requests relief for size of freestanding sign and setback for freestanding and entrante signage. Relief
also requested for number of freestanding signs.
Section 140-6 Signs for which permits are required
Parcel 309.13- -31.2 Signage: Freestanding Sign size proposed 84 sq ft where 45 sgft is the maximum allowed;
two entrance signs North and South to be located I ft from property line where a 15 ft setback is required only one
freestanding is allowed per parcel and 3 are proposed.
Parcel 308.16- -2.3 Signage: The administration building proposes one freestanding sign at 24 sq ft to be located at
0 it from Corinth and 13 ft from Carey ltd where a 15 ft se*ack is required,
SEAR Type: Unlisted [ Resolution/Action Required for SEQRJ
Motion regarding Sign Variance Z- -4-20X7 Hudson Headwater Health Network based upon the
information and the analysis of the above supporting documentation provided by the applicant,this Board
finds that this will not result In any significant adverse environmental impact. So we give it a Negative
Declaration,Introduced by who moved for its sdeption,secnnded by
Duly adopted this 26h of April 2017, by the following vote:
AYES:
TES:
A public hearing was advertiser{ and held on Wednesday, April 26,2017;
Upon review of the application materials, laformartion supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of
the criteria specified in Section 179-14-OSO(A)of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law
and after discussion and deliberation, we find as Follows;
I. Will an undesirable change be produced in the character of the neigliborliood 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,feasible for the applicant to pursue, other
than an sign variance? TNSERT RESPONSE,
3. Is the requested sign variance substantial? INSERT RESPONSE
4. Will the proposed sign variance have an adverse impact on the Physical or environmental conditions in the
rhe ighborh ood.or district? INSERT RESPONSE
5. Is the alleged difficulty self-created? INSERT RESPONSE
6. In addition the Hoard finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance world
outwei6 1 would be outweighed by 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 1 DENY Sign Variance T-SV-4-2017 Hudson
S3cadwateis Health Nefork, Introduced by _ —, who moved for its adoption, seconded by
As per the resolution prepared by staff with the following:
A. <insert conditions 1 comments:
B. The variance approval is valid for one(1) year from the date of approval; you may request an extension of
approval before the one (I)year time 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). The applicant is cautioned against taking any action until the APA's review
is completed;
D. Final approved plans in compliance with an approved variance rnnst be submitted to tht Community
Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building&. codes
personnel'
E, Subsequent issuance of further permits, including sign permits are dependent on receipt of these final plans;
F. 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 tbe,Town Planning Board and/or the Adirondack Park Agency, Lake George Park Commission or
other State agency or department.
Duly adopted this 26" day of April 2017, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Arts Variance No.. 2-2017
Project Applicant: Teudy Nueri
Project Location: 0 Ridden Hills
Parcel History: Bldg. Permit: AST-1-2017 carport addition; Aren Variance No. 12-2015 Fencc
F; R Type- Type 11
Meeting Date: April 26, 2017
Description of Proposed Pra�ect:
Applicant proposes construction of a 216 q 1t carport addition on the south side of the home. The project is an
open carport and includes expansion of the driveway area of about 75 sq ft. Relief requested from minimum
setback requirements of the MDR zoning district,
Relief Required;
The applicant requests relief from minimum setback requirements for the MDR torte.
179-3-040 Establishment of Districts-dimensional requirement MDR zone
The applicant proposes a 216 sq ft that is to be 13.85 ac from Hidden Hi]6s Dr where a 30 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. Minor to no impacts to the
neighborhood may be anticipated. The parcel is at the corner of bidden Hills and Dixon road.
. Whether the benefit sought by the, axpplitant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, other than aux area variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered limited due to
the location of the existing home on the lot.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The 7telief may be considered moderate relevant to
the code, The relief is for 16.15 ft.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Staff comments:
The applicant has provided plans for the construction of an open carport on the soutli side of the home along
Hidden Hills Dr. The carport is to he 12 ft 10 in with a pitched roof attached to the existing garage,
Zoning Board of Appeals — Record of Resolution
Town ofQueensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (31$) 761-82.38
Tuwn of{Zr�cols awry
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve l Disapprove
Applicant Mame: Teudy Nuesi
File Number-, -A -22.-2.017
Location-, 0 Hiddeu Hills Drive
Tax M2p plumber: 302,13-1-16
BA Meeting Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2017
The Zoning Beard of Appeals of the Town of Qoeetisbury has received an application finm Teudy Nuesi.
Applicant proposes construction of a 216 sq R carport addition on the south side of the home. The project is an
open carport and includes expansion of the drive ay area of about 75 sq ft. Relief requested from minimum
setback requirements of the MDR zoning district.
The applicant requests relief from minimum setback requirements for the MDR zone.
179-3-040 Establishment of Districts—dimensional requirement MDR zone
The applicant proposes a 216 sq ft that is to be 13.8 5 ac from Hidden Hills Dr where a 30 ft setback is required.
SEQR Type 11 —zoo further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, Apri 12 6, 2017;
Upon review of the application materials, infoTmation supplied during the public hearing, and upon
consideration of the criteria specified in Section i 79-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267
of NIYS Town Lax and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows:
PFR THF DRAFT PROVIDED 13Y STAIN~
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 rninirnize the request OR are not possible.
3. The requested variance is l is not substantial because
4. There is 1 is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or
district?
5. is the alleged difficulty is 1 is not self-created because
Page l of 2
6. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would
outweigh Noroval) / would be outweighed by (denial) the resulting detriment to the health. safety and
welfare of the neighborhood or community;
7. Ttic Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the mininium necessary;
8. The Board also proposes the following conditions:
a)
b)
c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter seat with this resolution.
BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIAN E
-AV- 2-2017. Teudy Nuesi, Introduced by _, who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 6°' day of April 2017 by the following vote:
AYES.
NOES:
Page 2 of 2
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No.: 13-2017
Project Applicant: Stephen, Carol & Andrew Bodette
Project LOCAs GM 10 Hemlock Road
Par-cel History: BOIi Septic Variance
SEQR Typc: Type H
Meeting Date: April 26, 2017
Description orf Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes a second floor renovation removing existing 572 sq. JI. and constructing proposed 570 solft,
second floor with office area and maswr bedroom. New construction does not meet shoreline setback and
expansion nonconforming. Project includes an existing porch renovation 98 +1- sq. ft. for new entryway and
open porch. Relief request from minimum setback and FAR requirements. Planning Board shall provide a
recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Planning Board: Pursuant to Chapter 179-1 -010 & 179-3-
040 of the ,Zoning Ordinance; expansion in a CEA shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval,
Reiief Regetired:
The applicant requests relief from minimum setback requirements and for Floor area ratio requirements
179-3-040 Establishment of Districts—dimensional re uireme'lat WR zone
The applicant proposes the second floor addition to be 2 5 ft from the shoreline where a 50 ft setback is required.
The floor area proposed is 26.70/a and required is 2,2%.
179-13-010 Expansion of iron conforming
The existing home 1s pre-existing non-compliant and the addition remains non-compliance towards the
shoreline_
Criteria for wnsidering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Tawn Law:
In making a determination, the board shall consider:
1. Whether an undesirable change will be Vrod uced in the character of the neighborhood 0r a detriment
to nearby properties will he created by the granting of this arca variance. Minor to no impacts to the
neighborhood may be anticipated.
. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursuc, other than an area varia nee. Feasible alternatives may be considered limited due to
the design of the home and location on the site.
. Whether the requested area variance is substantial The relief requested may be considered moderate
relevant to the code. Relief is requested for shoreline of 25 It for the setback and 4.1% for floor arca.
4. Whether the Vroposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created
staff eornment ;
The applicmnt proposes removing the existing second noor addition to construct a new second floor. The
existing site will remain unchanged with the major improvement is to the second floor area of the home and
porch that will be renovated to allow for a new enttyway and open porch area. The plans show the alterations to
the interior of the horne that include new access to the basement area, the first floor to update -two bedrooms
living area, 3-season porch, kitchen area, great-room and dining arem in an open floor plan, the second door—is
to have a master bedroom, office area, bathroom area and relocated stairway. The applicant has indicated there
is to be permeable pavers to be installed in front of the existing garage and eave trenches all the west and east
side of the home. The applicant has provided elevations and photos showing the existing and proposed views of
the Dome.
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Totes
E SOLUTION APPROVING I AROL BODETTE'S APPLICATIONFOR
SANITARY SEWAGE DISPOSAL VARIANCES
RESOLUTION NO.. BH 15, 2117
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Brian Clements
WHO MOVE'D ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED DED BY: Mr. Doug Irish
WHEREAS, Carol Bodelte filed an application for variances from provisions of the Town
of Queensbury On-Site Sewage Disposal Ordinance, Chapter 136 to install a replacement
wastewater treatment system as follows:
1. Absorption field to be located 4,6' from the north property line instead of the
required 10' setback;
Absorption field to be located .7' ftorn the east property line instead of the required
10' setback;
3. Force main to be 4.9' from the property line instead of the required 10' setback; and
4. Distribution box to be 5.1' from the property line instead of the required 10'
setback; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has also applied for a variance from Chapter 136, Section 136-
8(13), which sets forth that no component of a leaching facility shall be located under driveways,
roads, parking areas or areas subject to heavy loading, and the Applicant has requested approval for
a portion of the absorption field to be installed beneath the driveway on property located at 10
He nlock Road, Queensbury, and
WHEREAS, the Town Clerk's Office published the Notice of Public Hearing in the 'T'own's
official newspaper and the Local Board of Health duly conducted a public hearing concerning the
variance requests on Monday, April 17tb, 2017, and
WHET ,AS, the Town Clerk's Office has advised that it duly notified all property owners
within 500 feet of the subject property,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLED, that
1. due to the nature of the variances, the Local Board of Health determines drat the
variances would not be materially detrimental to the purposes and objectives of this
Ordinance or other adjoining properties nor otherwise conflict with the purpose and
objectives of any Town plan or policy; and
. the Local Board of IIealth finds that the granting of the variances is necessary for the
reasonable use of the land and is the minimum variances which would alleviate the
specific unnecessary hardship found by the Local Board of Health to affect the
applicant; and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Local Board of Health hereby approves the application of Carol
13odcttc for variances from the Sewage Disposal Ordinance to install a replacement wastewater
treatment system as follows=
1. Absorption field to be located 4.6' from the north property line instead of the
required 100' setback:
Absorption field to be located 6.7' from the east property line instead of the required
10' setback;
3. Force ntMn to be 4,9' from the property line instead of the required 10' setback; and
4. Distzribution box to be 5,1' froin the property line instead of the required 10'
setback; and
5. A portion of the absorption field to be installed beneath the driveway;
on properly located at 10 Hemlock Read, Queensbury, anal bearing Tax Map No.: 2,89.10-1-3 2.
Duly adopted this 17`h day of April, 2017, by the following vote:
AYES : Mr. Clemews, Mr. Irish, Mr. Brower, Mr. Strough, Mr. Metivier
NOES None
ABSENT: Done
3
Zoning Beard of Appea Is –Rece rd of Reselutinn
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-82')S
Two of Qyvr:uybvey
Area Variance resolution To: Approve 1 Disapprove
Applicant Name- Stephen, Cam] &,Andrew Bodette
File Number: Z-AV-13-2017
Location: 10 Hemlock Road
Tax Map Number. 289.10-1-32
BA Meeting Date: Wednesday, April 26, 017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Stephen,Carol
Andrew$adette. Applicant proposes a second floor renovation removing existing 572 sq. ft. and constructing
proposed 570 sq. ft. second floor with office area and master bedroom. New construction does not meet
shoreline setback and expansion nonconforming. Project includes an existing porch renovation 98 +/- sq. ft, for
new entryway and open pored. Relief request from minimum setback and FAR requirements. Planning Board
shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Piatniing Board: Pursuant to Chapter 179-13-
010 & 179-3-440 of the Zoning Ordinance, expansion in a CRA shall be subject to Planning Board review and
approval.
The applicant requests relief from minimum setback requirements and for Floor arca ratio requirements
179-3-040 Establishment of Districts-litnea Tonal.requirement WR zone
The applicant proposes the second floor addition to be 25 ft from the shoreline ,vheie a 50 ft setback is required,
The floor area proposed is 2.6.713c,and required is 2%.
179-13010 Expansion of non conforming
The existing home is pre-existing soon-compliant and the addition remains non-compliance towards the
shoreline.
SEAR Type 11 –no further review required;
public nearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, April 26, 2017;
Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon
consideration of the materia specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267
of NYS Town Law and after discussion and del iberation, 'we find as follows:
PER THE DR PROV IDED B Y STAFF
1. Them is 1 is not ars 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 possible,
Page 1 of
3. The requested variance is/ is not substantial because
4. There is..! is not an adverse impact an the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or
district"?
5. Is the alleged difficulty is f is not self-created because
G. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would
outwaigh (aperoval� / would be oumei,.hed by (denial) the resulting detriment to the hemlth, safety and
welfare of the neighborhood or community;
7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
S, The Board also proposes the following conditions:
a)
b) ,
e) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution.
BASED ON THE ABOVE FrNDINGS, I MAKE A M07'10N TO APPROVE 1 DENY AREA VARIANCE
-AV-i 3-2017, Stephen, Carol &Andrew Bodette, Jntroduaed by who moved for its adoption, seconded
by
Duly adopted this 26"' day of April 2017 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Page 2 of