Loading...
Staff Notes Meeting Packet ZBA Wed., December 19, 2018 St'%ff Hote2 ZBA Meeting Wednesday, December 19, 2018 Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals al Agenda Meeting: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 Time. 7:00- 11 :00 prn Queensbury Activities Ceriter- 742 Bay Road Agenda subject to change and may be found at: .queensbvey_net Approval of meeting minutes: November 14,2018 Administrativ ]terns; Z-AV-28-2017 Seaton Property Holdings, LLC(A-I Tres Works.). Further Tabling Zoning Board of Appeals Election of Officers. Vice Chairman and Secretary for Year 2019 Approval of Meeting Dates Calendar for Year 2019 NEW BUSINESS; A liean S Cameron R. Lewis Area Vorionce No Z-AV-68-2018 Owns s Jose h Woodward SEQRAT if A en# s Mike Lewis Lot Size 5.87 Acre(s) Location I 1 Old West Mountain Road Zoning I -5A Ward No. Ward 3 Tax Id No 295.6-1-8 Section 179-3-M Cr s Ref SP 2-2012 Warren Counly Plauning December 2018 Public Ifearing I December 19 2018 Adirondack Park Agency n1a Pro jeer)Glescript" Applicant proposes construction of a single-family home(1,392 sq. ft.footprint). Home is to be 1 1/3 story with a loft and unfinished basement_ Relief requested from minimum setback requirements. Planning Board. Site Plan Review mquined for land disturbances within 50 ft. of LS percent staK AR phennt s Brenton& Lauren Meiihede Area Variance No Z-AV-74-2018 Owners Brenton& Lauren MeiIhede SE RA Type [I A ent s nva Lot Size 1.02 Acre(s) Location 7 Noble Way, Kings Court Subd. Zoning SFR-lA at time ofSubd, Ward Na. Ward 3 approval;current MDR Tax Id No 301,5-1-53 Seetioa 179-3-040; 179-5-070 Cross ]ref POOL 695-2018;AV 31-2008 fence;SB Warren County Planning nfa 18-2002 Public H"ring December 19 2018 Adirondack Park Agency n{a Project Demription Applicant proposes construction of an inground swimming pool to be loured is the non-architectural front yard on the West Mountain side of the parcel. Relief requested from requirements For p lacemn mt of a pool in a yard other than the rear yard_ 1rG addition,Area Variance 3 1-2008 granted approval for a privacy fence in a front yard. Add itiona i relief for the additional privacy fence is required as wel I.The location of the existing workshop addition roquiros v�nance relief from minimum the setback requirement of 24 ft_ Page 1 of 2 Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Meeting: Wednesdoy, December 19, 2018 Time. 7:00- 1 LOD pm Queensbury ,Activities Center— 742 Boy Road Agenda subject to change and may be found at: www.queensbury.net Applicant(s) John R. Buchanan Area Variance No Z-AV-75-2018 Owners John R_ Buchanan Trust SE RA Type 11 A en s Jarrett Engineers, PLLC Lot Size 0.75 Acres) Location 66 Reardon Road Zoning WR Word No. Ward 1 Tax Id No 289.11-1-38 Section 179-13-010 E Cross Ref SP 74-2018 Modificatian; SP 5B-2018 Warren County Planning n1a Public Hearin Decernber 19,2019 Adirondack Park Agency n1a Pro i ect.Desc riPtion Appi icant proposes revision to remove existing open deck to construct enclosed parch of 92.5 sq, it.; portion of wall Sections adjoining the deck area also to be removed and reconstructed about 81t. Project includes construction of an additional 112 sq.ft. ramp extension to existing wheelchair ramp. Relief requested from minimum setback and shoreline setback YglAirements. Plannin Roard: Site Plan Review for modification to an approved.pUm. Applicant(s) C. Raymond Davis& Sons LLC Area Y>irian" No Z-AV-76-2018 Owners Robert 8c Lorraine Carbogn in SEQRAT a II A ent s Hutchins Engineering Lot Size OA5 Acre(s) Locatiaur 197 Assembly Point Road zGning WR Ward No. Ward i Tax Id No 226,19-2-2 Section 179-3-040; 179-13-010 Cross Ref 3P 79-2018 Warren Conn ty Plan ni Fig December 2018 Public Hearing December 19,2018 Adirondack Park Agency ALD Project Description Applicant proposes cons4ucdon of a residential addition and alterations to existiner home which includes construction of 176 sq, ft, of new floor area involving two new roof lines- Relief requested frcrrn minimum setback requirement& Plannin Board= Site Plan Review for expansion of a nonconforming use in a EA_ Any further business that the Chairman determines maybe properly brought before the Zoning Board of Appeals_ Final Version Agenda= 11.28.2018 L:1Sue Hemingway12018 Year ZBA\1.13A December 20181ZBA Agenda Wcd_, Dcocmber 19,2018_docx Page 2 of 2 Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: 68-2018 Project Applicant: Cameron R. Lewis Project Locution: I l Old West !Mountain Road Parcel History: SP 2-2012 SEAR Type: Type It Meeting Date: December 19,2018 Description oFProposed Projcc#: Applicant proposes construction of a single-family home (1,392 sq, ft, footprint). Home is to be 1 1/2 story with a loft and unfinished basement. Relief requested from minimum setback requir-cments. Planning Board: Site Plan Review required for land disturbances within 50 ft, of a 15 percent slope. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief from minimum setback requirement in the Dural Residential 5 acre zone. Section 179-3-040 Dimensional. Requirements The applicant proposes a single family home to be located 3 T6 ft from the front property line where 100 ft is required and is to be 2 2.7 ft from the side property line North where 75 ft is required. Ct iteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town In rocking a determination, the board shall consider: 1, NVhether 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 the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be considerred limited due to the topography of the parcel. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code_ belief requested for front setback is 62.4 ft, belief requested for the side setback is 52..3 1t. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact an the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project may be considered to have minimal impacts on the physical or the enviromnental conditions of the area. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty vas self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments' The applicant to construct a new single family with a foot print of 1,392, sq ft. The new home is to have a basement, €t main floor and a Ioft area. The site plan shows the location of the new home, the driveway area and the site work. Zoning Board of Appeals— Recerd of Resolution Taws of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 TOLVII crr(Lceirshary Area Variance Resolution To: Approve/ Disapprove Applicant Name Cameron R. Lewis File Number: Z-AV- -2018 Location: 11 Old West Mountain road Tax Map Number. 2.95.6-1-8 ZtBA Meeting Date: Wednesday, December 1 , 2018 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application fronn Cameron R. Lewis. Applicant proposes construction of a single-family home (1,392 sq, ft. footprint). Horne is to be 1 story with a loft and unfinished basement. Relief requested from minimum setback requirements, Planning Board: Site Plan Review required for land disturbances within 50 ft. of a 15 percent slope. Relief Required- The applicant requests relief from minimum setback requirement in the Rural Residential 5 acre zone. Section 17 -3-040 Dimensional Raquirernents The applicant proposes a single family home to be located 37.6 ft from the front property line where 100 ft is required and is to be 223 ft from the side property line North where 75 ft is required. SE R Type TI —no further review required; public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, December 19, 2019; Upon review of the application materials, infonnation supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria Wei fled in Section 17 -14-08U( of the Queensbury Town Cade and Chapter 267 ofNYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows: 1'ER TIME DI AF"I- PROVIDED BY STAFF 1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because . Feasible alternatives are and have been consideired by the Board, are Treasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible, 3, The requested variance is 1 is not substantial because 4. There is 1 is not an adv rse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is 1 is not self-created because . In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would 011tweig,h (a , roval) / would he outweighed by denial the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community; 7. The Board also rinds 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 ou#lined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE I DEN Y AREA VARiANC:E -AV- 8-2018, Cameron R. Lewis, lntroduced by _, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 1 °i day of Deoernber 2018 by the fo11owing vote: AYES'. NOES. Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Deparimeni Staff Notes Area Varian" No.: 74-2018 Project Applicant: Brenton &. Lauren Mielhede Project LGattion. 7 Motile WRy Parcel History. POOL 695-2018; AV 31-209H fence; SB 18-2002 F R Type: Type H Meeting Date: December 19,2018 Description ofPro pas ed Prnjcct: Applicant proposes construction of an inground swinuning pool to be located in the non-architectural front yard on the West Mountain side of the parcel. Relief requested from requirements for placement of a pool in a yard other than the rear yard. In addition, Area Variance 31- 008 granted approval for a pTilvacy fence in a front yard. Additional relief fir the additional privacy fence is required as well. Tile location of the existing workshop addition requires variance relief from minim urn the setback requirement of 20 ft, Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for location of a pool and a fence relocation in the Moderate Density zone: Section 179-5-00- Pool The applicant proposes a pool in the Mont yard as the panel is bordered by two roads. Pools are to be located in the rear yard. Section 179-5-070 —Fence The applicant proposes to extend the fence on the south side of the property with 6 ft high privacy fencing. Fencing its the front yard is to up to 4 ft in height and non opague. Criteria for cnnsidcring an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town haw: Ian making a determination, the board shall consider: l. 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 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 die to parcel location bordering two roads—Noble Way and West Mountain Road. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered substantial relevant to the code. belief is requested for placement of a pool in a front yard and a 6 ft high privacy fence also in the front yard, +4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental eonditions in the neigh horhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated. $. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created Staff comrnentsi The applicant proposes to install a 912 sq ft in-ground pool with a patio that surrounds the pool. The project also includes extending the existing privacy fence along lest Mountain Road. The plans show the location of the pool and fencing. Zoning Beard of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes .oning Board of Appeals— record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, ICY 12804 (518) 7 1-92,38 Two dQjcxfFaba,ry Area Variance) esolutioit To: Approve /Disapprove Applicant Name: Brenton & Lauren Meilhede File Number: Z-AV-74-2018 Location: 7 Noble Way q. Tax Map Number. 301.5-1- 3 BA Meeting Date: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 The Zoning Board of Appear of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Brenton & Lauren Meilhede. Applicant proposes construction of an ingmund swimming pool to be located in the non- architectural front yard on the Nest Mountain side of the parcel. Relief requested from requirements for placement of a pool in a yard other than the rear yard. In addition, Area Variance 31- 009 granted approval for a privacy fence in a front yard. Additional relief for the additional privacy fence is required as well. The location of the existing workshop addition requires variance relief from minimum the setback requirement of 20 ft. Relict Required The applicant requests relief for location of a pool and a fence relocation in the Moderate Density zone: Section 17 -5-020- Pool The applicant proposes a pool in the front yard as the parcel is bordered by two roads. Pools are to be located in the rear yard. Section 179-5-070—Fence The applicant proposes to extend the fence on the south side of the property with 6 ft high privacy fencing. Fencing in the front yard is to yap to 4 ft in height and non opague. SEAR Type II — no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, December 19, 2019; Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public heading, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 17 -14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of Y S '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 . Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible. I 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. The alleged difficult is 1 is not self-created because G. in addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh (aj2proval) / would be outweighed b 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 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 FIN Q INGS. I MAKE A MOICION TO APPROVE 1 DEIFY AREA V ARIANCE -AV-74-2018. Brenton & Lauren Meilhede, Introduced by who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 1 "' day of December 2,018 by the following vote- AYES- No E : Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: 75-2018 Project Appiieant: John R. Buchanan Project Location: 66 Reardon Road Parcel History: SP 74-2018 Modifiemion; SP 58-2019 E R Type: Type II Meeting Date: December 1 ,2018 Deset iption of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes rrvision to remove existing open deck to construct enclosed porch of 915 sq, ft.; the wall sections adjoining the deck area are to be removed and reconstructed this is about 8 ft, Project includes construction of an additional 112 sq_ ft_ ramp extension to existing wheelchair ramp_ Relief requested from minimum setback and shoreline setback requirements_ Planning Board, Site Plan Review for modification to an approved plan, Relief Required. The applicant requests relief from the minitnutn shoreline setback requirements for accessory structures in the WR zoning district. Section 179-3-040 Dimensional Requirements The applicant proposes to remove existing open deck to construct and includes removal ofthe wall sections that adjoin the deck where the, side setback is to be 6ft 10 in where a 20 ft is required and it is to be 27 ft 8 in from the shoreline where a 50 ft setback is required. The project still includes a proposed update to a wheel chair ramp with a new wooden pathv,-ay that is about 34 ft 2 in in length and is to be aft 6 in width with a 4 ft wide landing area midway of the wooden path. The wooded path is to be located 3 ft 1 l its .from the shoreline where a 50 ft setback is required. Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law: to making a determination, the board shall consider: 1. Whether an andesirable cha age wiH be producer) 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. . Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasibic for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be limited due to placement of the existing building on the parcel and parcel shape.. . Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code. The relief requested is 13 ft 2 in to the side property line and 22 fc 4 in from the shoreline ror new enclosed porch. The wooden pathway relief requested is 46 ft 1 in. 4. Whether the proposed variance ► ill have an adverse effect or impact OPM 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 difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes to alter an existing home to remove an open deck and to construct an enclosed a 923 sq ft deck, remove some of the existing deck area, and to redo the front entrance area with a raised roof area. The project now includes removal of wall sections adjoining to the new proposed enclosed deck and reconstracting those sections. Also, as already indicated the project still includes the proposal construction of a wood pathway from the existing driveway area to the shoreline to help a wheelchair bound client to access the shoreline boathouse area of the property. The plans show the revisions with the wall sections and enclosed porch as well as the wood pathway. Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff mates Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, N Y 12804 (518) 761-8 38 rC3WFJ Area Varianee ResOution To: Approve I Disapprove Applicant Name; John R. Buchanan �� , � 1 File Number- Z- -75-201 Location: 66 Reardon Road Tax Map Number: 9.11-1-3 8 ZRA Meeting Date: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Jahn R. Buchanan. Applicant proposes revision to remove existing open deck to construct enclosed parch of 92.5 sq. fL; the wall sections adjoining the deck area are to be removed and reconstructed this is about 8 ft. Project includes construction of an additional H 2 sq. ft. ramp extension to existing wheelchair ramp. Relief requested from minirnum setback and shoreline setback requirements. Planting Board: Site Plan Review for modification to an approved plan. )lief Required: The applicant requests relief from the minimum shoreline setback requirements for accessory structures in the VIR zoning district. Section 179-3-044 Dimensional Requirements The applicant proposes to remove existing open deck to construct and includes removal of the wall sections that adjoin the deck where the side setback is to be 6 ft 10 in where a 24 ft is required and it is to be 27 ff 8 in from the shoreline where a 50 ft setback is required. The project still includes a proposed update to a wheel. chair ramp with a new wooden pathway that is about 34 ft 2 in in length and is to he aft 6 in width with a 4 ft wide landing area midway of the wooden path. The wooden path is to be located 3 ft 1 l in from the shoreline where a 50 ft setback is required. SEAR Type Yf —no further review required; public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, December 19, 2018; 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 NY S Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we 0nd as follows: PER THE DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF 1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2, Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to rniniinize the request DR are not possible. 3, The requested varimee is /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, The alleged difficulty is 1 is not self-created because . In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh a roval / would be outweighed b 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 minimum necessary; $, The Board also proposes the following conditions: a) b) a c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE 1 DENY AREA VARIANCE AV-75-20IS. John I . Buchanan, Introduced b _, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 19th day of December 2018 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Comrnunity Development Department Staff dotes Area Variance No.: 76-2018 Project Applicknt: C. Raymond Davis & Sons, LLC Project Location- 197 Assembly Point Road Parcel History: SP 78-2018 SFQR Type: Type 11 Meeting Date: December 19, 2018 Description of Proposed Proect; Applicant proposes construction of a residential addition and alterations to existing home wbich includes construction of 176 sq. ft. of new floor area involving two new roof lines. Relief requested from minimum setback requirements. P[au ning Board: Site Pion Review for expansion of a nonconfoiming use in a CEA. Relief)Required: The applicant requests relief from minimum setback requirements in the Waterfront Residential zoning district and expansion of non conforming structure. Section 179-3-040 Dimensional requirements. Section 179-13-010 Non cqLforming The applicant proposes alterations to the roof line on an existing home includes over bangs and a new peaked roof section. The proposed setbacks are 12.7 ft new roof line side setback on the front of the home and a 9 ft new roofline side setback on the garage roof area to the south property line whrre a 20 ft setback is required. riteria 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 he produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. The prof cct may be considered to have little to no irrrnpact on the neighboring properties. 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 to due to the existing location of the home on the}parcel. . Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief may be considered moderate relevant to the code. Relief is reclui�sted for 7.3 ft to the new peaked roof area and 11 ft for the new rooi;line for the garage roof. 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 or area. 5. Whether the alleged difticuity was self created. The project as proposed may be considered self oreated. Staff comments: The applicant proposes to alter the roof lines on an existing home to move storm water runoff further from the walls of the home. The new peaked roof line is also to add an architectural feature to the home. The plans show the elevations and interior plans for the home. Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff dotes OL. Zoning Board of Appeals— Record of Res a]ation Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 128t}4 (518) 761-8238 15OLM OrQueerrshury Area Variance Resolution To: Approve 1 Disapprove Applicant Name- C. Raymond Davis & Sons, LLC File Dumber: Z-A -76-2.01 S �- Location: 17 Assembly Point load44 Tax Map dumber: 2 6.19- - BA Meeting Date: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from C. Raymond Davis & Sons, LLC. Applicant proposes construction of a residential addition and alterations to existing horne which includes construction of 176 sq. ft. of new floor area involving two new roof fines. Relief requested from minimum setback requirements. Planning Board: Site Plan Review for expansion of nonconforming use in a CEA. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief from minimum setback requirements in the Waterfront Residential zoning district and expansion of a nonconforming structure. Section 17 -3-440 Dimensional requirements, Section 179-13-010 Nonconforming The applicant proposes alterations to the roof line on an existing home includes over hangs and a new peaked roof section. The proposed setbacks are 12.7 ft new roof line side setback on the front of the home and a 9 ft new roofline side setback on the garage roof area to the south property line where a 20 ft setback is required. SEAR Type II —no further review required; public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, December 19, 2018; Upon review of the application materials, inforniation supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-1 4-4$O(A) of the Queensbury Town Cycle and Chapter 267 ofNY S Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows: PER THE DRAB-r PROVIDED BY STAFF 1. There is I 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 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. The alleged difficult+ 1s 1 is riot self-oreated because . In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh a royal 1 would be outweighed by denial the resulting dctriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community; * The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary; 8. The Board also proposes the following conditions: a) b} x c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. BASED ON THE ABOVE FrNDTNGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE -AST-7 - 41 8, C. Raymond Davis & Sons, LL , Introduced by!, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 19`h day of December 2018 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: