Staff Notes AV 36-2011_Hlavaty_Starrett_06 28 11
Town of Queensbury
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No.: 36-2011
Project Applicant: Dawn Hlavaty-Starrett
Project Location: 157 Glen Lake Road
Meeting Date: June 28, 2011
Description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes subdivision of a 14.67 +/- acre parcel into four lots ranging in size from 2.16 +/- acres
to 5.10 +/- acres.
Relief Required:
Parcel will require area variances as follows (all proposed relief as per §179-3-040):
1.Lot 1
a)Lot width – Request for 110 feet of relief from the 400 foot requirement.
b)Lot size – Request for 0.84 acres of relief from the 3 acre requirement.
2.Lot 2
a)Lot width – Request for 95 feet of relief from the 400 foot requirement.
b)Road frontage – Request for 203.36 feet of relief from the 400 foot requirement.
3.Lot 3
a)Lot width – Request for 130 feet of relief from the 400 foot requirement.
b)Road frontage – Request for 228 feet of relief from the 400 foot requirement.
4.Lot 4
a)Road frontage – Request for 400 feet of relief from the 400 foot requirement.
5.Density
1.Request for 2.65 acres from the 12 acre usable or buildable acres required as per §183-26
for total subdivision.
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
impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated.
2.
Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, other than an area variance.
Feasible alternatives would be to reduce the
subdivision from 4 lots down to 3 lots, eliminating the need for multiple variances.
3.
Whether the requested area variance is substantial.
Concerning Lot 1, the request for 110 feet or
27% relief from the 400 foot lot width requirement for the RR-3A zone may be considered minor to
moderate relative to the code. The request for 0.84 acres or 28% relief from the 3 acre lot size
minimum may be considered minor to moderate relative to the code.
Concerning Lot 2, the request for 95 feet or 24% relief from the 400 foot lot width requirement may be
considered minor to moderate relative to the code. The request for 203 or 51% relief from the 400
foot road frontage requirement may be considered moderate to severe relative to the ordinance.
Concerning Lot 3, the request for 130 feet or 32% relief from the 400 foot lot width requirement may
be considered moderate relative to the ordinance. The request for 228 feet or 57% of relief from the
400 foot road frontage requirement may be considered moderate to severe relative to the ordinance.
Concerning Lot 4, the request for 400 feet or 100% of relief from the 400 foot road frontage
requirement may be considered severe relative to the ordinance.
Density relief for the project in totality requires 2.65 acres or 22% relief from the 12 acre usable or
buildable acres required as per §183-26 and must be approved by this board.
Note: The determination of whether the requested area variance is substantial is based on an
empirical calculation and not subjective reasoning.
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 moderate impacts may be
realized due to steep slopes. However, the project calls for stormwater and Erosion and Sediment
controls.
5.
Whether the alleged difficulty was self created
. The difficulty may be considered self created.
Parcel History (construction/site plan/variance, etc.):
SUB 3-2011 Pending
Staff comments:
The applicant has increased the access road slope from 10% to 12%. As a result, cut slopes associated
with the proposed road have been markedly reduced from the sketch plan proposal. The benefits and
disadvantages of this action will need to be weighed by the Planning Board.
SEQR Status:
Type II-no further action required.
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
L:\Keith Oborne\2011 Staff Notes\Zoning\June 29\AV 36-11_Hlavaty_Starrett_06 28 11.doc
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes