Loading...
Staff Notes Packet Thurs., May 30, 2019 ZBA Mtg. , Thursday, May 3®, 2® 1 � Queensbury Zoning Board of Appec�ls Agenda Meeting: Thursday, Moy 30, 2019 Times: 7:00 pm- 1 1:00 pm Queansbt�ry Activities Center- 742 Boy Rood Agenda subject to cho nge and may be found ot: www.queansbt.lry.net OLD BUS]NE9S: A Ilcan<a Columbia Dcvelo m Si n Variances No Z-SV-0-2019 Own¢r s The Sa[ato Hos iRl t 9E RAT Unlisted A ¢nt z Gavin Vuillaume: HDP Lot Siu 1.04 Acres Loeatlon l24 Main Street Zoning Cl-l8 Ward No_ Ward 4 Taz!d No 309.14-1-5 3cction Cha rer 140 Cross Rcf Z-AV-10-2019;SP 19-2019:AV 31-1990;SP Warran County Plannivg April 2019 18-1990-DISC 4-2018 Public Hoarin A rll 24.2019-Ma 30 2019 Adirondsak Park A ¢ Na Proj¢e<Description Applicant proposes wnatruetion of a new 10,000 sq.R.medical off ce building and to install a 70 sq.R.Freestanding sign o be bcaxd less tfian 15 R.Rom the ptopery line.Project in¢ludcs ire[allation oEtwo wall signs at 68 sq.R.[o beintemally lii. Relief requested from m sign size and m m setback requirements for the Raestantling sign. Alsq relief requestad£or[ha two wall signs exceeding the maxirn�um allowabl®si siu�oF 30 s R. NEW BUSINESS: A ll¢ant a Michael ffi Sus Tarts LLonc Ar¢a Vsrlanca No AV 21-2019 OWn¢r s MSLL Dcvdo m S RAT II A ¢ Na Lot SGza O.5']Acres Lo¢atlon 4l Wastbcrry Waynt Pines Ridge Estaue Zonmg 8A-lA at time of Subd.Approval Ward No_ Ward 4 Taz Id No 308J-t-32 Sac[ian 109-5A20 Cress Ref 8B 0-2003 Warrav Coun Plannin Na Public Havrin Ma 3Q 2019 Adirondack Park A ¢ Na Project Daacription Applicants proposes placement oFa 368 sq.R.shed on[beir parcel. Relief requested Rom minimum aetbaCK requimmmts £or the SR-lA¢O district at the[ e Pine Aid c Estates. Any further business that the Chairman de[ertnines may be properly brougtrt before[he Zoning Board of Appeals. Revised Agenda Vcrsioty 5.24.2019 NOA 1-2018 A NOA 1-2019 Completed at 5.22.2019 mtg. Final Agenda Vetaion: 4.30.2019 CB/LM/sh Town of 4ueensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community development Deportment Staff Notes Sfgn Variance No.a 4-2019 P roj¢ct Applfcant: Columbia D¢v¢topm¢nt Project Location: 124 Main Street Parc¢i Hlatorya iUAV-10-20195 SP 39-21119, AV 11-199ng SP 18-19905 DISC 4-203$ SEAR Typ¢: UnBsted Meeting Dat¢: May 30,2039 D¢scr: Non of Proposed Project. Applicant proposes construction o£a new 19,900 sq- R- medical office building and to install a 59 sq R freestanding sign revised from "10 sq- R- freestanding sign to be located less than 15 R- Rom the property line- Pr jeer includes installation o£two wall signs at 60 sq- R- to be internally lit Relie£r¢questad Rom maximum sign size and minimum setback requirements for ttve Reestanding sign. Also,relief requested£or the two wall signs exceeding the maximum allowable sign size o£30 sq- R- Relief R¢quir¢d- Chanter 140-Si¢ns The applicant proposes a free standing sign that has been revised from"l0 sq R and n w proposed 5"1 sq R where them m allowed is 45 sq R- The free standing sign is to be located 2R g-om Main St and Sig Boom Rd where av15 R setback is required. The [wo wall signs are proposed to r main at the proposed 60 sq R each where the maximum allowed is 30 sq R- Noting the color scheme has been updated Rom a neutral color to a red, blue and white scheme- Criteria for considering a Sign Variance a rordivg to Cha ter 260 of Town Law: In malting a determination, the board shall consider: 1. Wh¢th¢r an undesirable Chang¢will be produced in the character of the neighborhood o a detriment to nearby properties will b¢ created by the gr Wring of this sign variant¢. There is minimal change to [he neighborhood as tl-ve signs are to match the scale of the two story building- 2. Whether the b¢n¢lIt sought by the applicant can b¢ achieved by a method, feasible For the applic nt to purav¢, other than a sign variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered to reduce the see of each of the signs to be compliant. 3. Wh¢th¢r the r¢qu¢at¢d afgn variant¢is avbstantial. Relief requested for the free standing setback is 13 R for both road setbacks and 13 sq t} in excess- The relieF requested £or the wall signs is 30 sq R in excess Tor each sign- 4. Wh¢th¢r the propos¢d variance will ha adverse eff¢ct or mpact on the physical ertvirortmerttal cortditiorta in the n¢ighborhoodaor district. "the proposed sign vat ianccs n,ay have nvnu-nal impact on the environmental conditions of the neighborhood- 5. Wheth¢r the aL¢g¢d difficulty was self-cr¢at¢d. The di£t3culty may be considered sel{_created. Staff commertts- Tfie applicant proposes fias r sed the size o£tkae Ree standing sign reduced to 5] sq R. Tfie two wall signs are proposed to remain the same at 60 sq R size on the side o£the building- The applicant has updated tfie color schemer ing the neutv-al tfieme to include a red, white and blue- The plans show location o{the sign and the parcel conRguration in that area- The wall signs are to be located at the Main Street side o£tbe building and the of the building that leas views from the north way- The plans show the location o£each o£the signs and tfie typical wording £or each sign Zoning Boc�rd of Appeals Community �evelopmeni De partm eni Staff Notes Zoniag Saard of Appeals—A¢co ra of R¢solution Town of Queensbury"]42 Bay Road Queensbury,NV 12804 (518)961-8238 /i�um�Y($s osbwi' Sign Variauc¢ Resolution Toc Approve/Disapprove Applicant Nam¢: Columbia Development Fil¢Numb¢r SV 4-2019 Location: 124 Maia Street Tax Map Numb¢r 309.14-1-5 ZBA M¢¢tiug Date: Thursday,May 30, 2019 The Zoning Board o£Appeals o£the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Columbia Dev¢lonm¢nt£or a vaziance Horn Chapt¢r 140 o{the Sign Code of The Town o£Queensbury_ Applicant proposes nstruction o£a new 19,900 sq. R. medical o££ace building and to install a 5'] sq R freestanding sign revised{rom "l0 sq_ R. 8¢estanding sign to be located less than 15 R. from the property line. Project includes installation o{two wall signs at 60 sq. R. to be internally lit_ Relie£requested Horn maximum sign size and minimum setback requiremeats £or the freestanding sign. Also,reli¢£requested for the two wall signs exceeding the maximum allowable sign size o£30 sq. R. R¢lief Required: Chanter 140-Signs The applicant proposes a freestanding sign that has been r sed from"]O sq R and n w proposed 57 sq R where the maximum allowed is 45 sq R. The tl-eestanding sign is Lobe located 2R {om Main St and Big Soom Rd wher¢ a ]5 R setback is required. The two wall signs a e proposed to mmain at the proposed 60 sq R each where th¢ m m allowed is 30 sq R. Noting the color scheme leas been updated tvom a neutral color to a red, blue and white scheme. SEQA Type: Unlist¢d [ R¢solutiou /Action R¢q uir¢d for SEQR] Motion r¢gardiug Sign Variane¢No_ 4-2019 Columbia D¢v¢lopm¢ut bas¢d upon the information nd tb¢ analysis of the above supporting docum¢utation provid¢d by th¢applicant, this Board finds that this will not result in any signi£acant adv¢rs¢ a ntal impact_ So w¢ give it a Ncgartiv¢ D¢claratiou, Introdve¢d by Micha¢l McCabe who mov¢d £or its adoption, s¢cond¢d by Runald Kuhl: Duly adopted 30`k day o{May 2019, by the £ollowiag vote: AYES: NONE: A public hearing was advertised and held on Thursday, May 3Q 2019; Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration o£the criteria speci£ved in Section 199-14-080<A) o£the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 26O o{NYS Town Law and a13er discussion and deliberation, we Fnd as follows: 1. Will an undesirable change be produced in the character o£the neighborhood or will a detriment to the nearby properties be created by the granting o£the requested sign variance4 INSERT RESPONSE 2. Can the bene£vt sought by the applicant be achieved by s method,Feasible{r xhe applicant to pursue, other than an sign variance? INSERT RESPONSE e 3_ Is the requested sign variance substantial? INSERT RESPONSE 4_ Will the proposed sign v - e have an adverse impacx on the physacal or environmental conditions an the neighborhood or dstraictT INSERT RESPONSE 5. Is the alleged difficulty self-createdY INSERT RESPONSE 6. In addition the Board£ds that the benefvt to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outwei¢h/would be outweighed by the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community; ']. The Board also Fnds that the variance request under consideration is the manamum necessary; Based on the above fvndings I make a MOTION TO APPROVE/DENY Sign Variance No_4-2019 Columbia Development, Introduced by , who moved{r its adoption, seconded by As per the resolution prepared by sta££with the following: A. <insert conditions/comments>: B. Th¢ variance appro al i alid £or one<lj ye r 8om the data o£approval; you may request an extension o£approval before the one (1J year time frame expires; C. I£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 i mpliance with an appro ed variance must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any iurther review by the Zoning Administrator or Building Rc codes p¢rsorarael' E. Subsequ nt issuance o£further permits, including sign permits are dependent on receipt o£these £nal plans; F_ Upon approval o£the application; r wand approval o££anal plans by the Community Development Department the applicant can apply£or a sign permit unless the proposed project requires review, approval, or permit{m true Town Planning Board and/or the Adirondack Park Agency, Lake George Park Commission or other State agency or department. Duly adopted this 30`^ day o£May 2019,by the Following vote: AYES: NOES: Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community l7evelopm eni Deportment 57otf Notes Area Variance No": 21-2019 Project Applicant: Mtcha¢I Se Susan TatTaglione Project Locations 41 W¢siberry Way Parcel History_ SB'7-2003 SEAR Typ¢: Type II M¢¢ting Dat¢: May 30,2019 Description of Proposed Yro"ect Applicants proposes placement o£a 168 sq. R. shed on their parcel. Relic£requested£ram minimum setback requ-rements£or the SR-lA zoning district at the time Pine Ridge Estates_ R¢li¢£Re ufr¢d" The applicant requests r¢lie£Rom minimum setback requirements£or the SR-lA zoning district at tfie time Pine Ridge Estates for placement o£a shed on the property. The parcel is cuaently zoned MDR however the zoning setback o£SR-lA were establisfied with Pine Ridge Est tes subdivision o£2003. S - 1']9 3 040 D- 1 A The applicant proposes tkve 168 sq R shed to be located 5 R Rom the side property line where a 10 R setback is requ red_ Criteria for considering an Area Variance ordin to Chapter 26�of Town Law: In mah3ng a determination, the board shall coasid¢r: I. Whether an undesirable change wilt b¢produced in the character of the a¢ighborhood or a detriment to a rby properties wIIl b¢ c at¢d by the greeting o£this area veriest¢" Minor to ao unpacts to the eighborhood may be anticipated. 2" Whether the beae£at sought by the applicant can b¢ achieved by some method, Feasible For the applicant to pu u¢, other rhea an area variant¢. Feasible alternatives appear due to the exterior utilities o£the home and the orientation o£the shad on the lot. 3. Wh¢th¢r the requested area variant¢ is subataatial. The relie£r¢quested may be considered moderate relevant to the code. Reli¢£is requested £or side setback o£5 R. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or ¢nvironm¢ntal conditions in the neighborhood or district Minor impacts on the physical or onmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated. 5" Wh¢th¢r the alleged dif£culty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created_ Staf£commestaa The applicant proposes to place a shed on the property that does not meet the setbacks. The applicant has indicated the shed location is du¢to the location o£the driveway and the electric power_ The plans show the shed that is typical to the one they are purchasing. The shed is io match the color o£tfie existing home and door width will is less than 6R in width. Zoaiag Board o£APP¢als—R¢cord of Resolution Town of Queensbury "]42 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) "]61-8238 r.,....oraL cc.,-� ..o. Area Variaac¢R¢solutioa To: Approve/Disapprove Applicant Name: Michael 8c Susan Tartaglione � �C_'f� a� Fil¢Numb¢r AV 21-2019 ��Y �¢ Location: 41 Westberry Way Tax Map Numb¢r: 308.']-1-32 ZBA M¢etiag Dat¢: Wednesday, May 30, 2019 The Zoning Boats of Appeals o£the Town o£Queensbury has received an application Rom Michael 8z Susan Tartagliou¢_ Applicants proposes placement o£a 168 sq. R. shed on their parcel. Aelie£requested Rom minimum setback requirements £ot the SR-lA zoning district at th¢time Pine Ridge Estates. Rel:e£Required: The applicant requests relie£Rom minimum setback requirements £or the SA-lA zoning disVict at the time Pine Ridge Estates £or placement o£a shed on the property. The parcel is currently zoned MDR however the zoning setback o£SR-1 A were established with Pine Aidge Estates subdivision o£2003. S ti n 199-3-040 Dimensional Aeouirements Th¢applicant proposes the 168 sq R shed to be located 5 R Rom the side property line where a 1 O R setback is required. SEQR Type II—no £ur@ver review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Thuradav_May 30_ 2019; Upon review o£ the application materials, in£orrrvation supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration o£tkve criteria speci£ved in Section ]"19-14-080(A) o£the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 26] o£NYS Town Law and aRer discussion and deliberation,we Rnd as Follows= PER TfIE DRAFT PROVLDED BY STAFF 1. There is / i not a undesirable change in the character o£ the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties b¢c 2. Feasible alternatives a and have been considered by the Board, a reasonable and have been eluded to minimize the r est OR are npt uossible. 3. The requested variance is/i of substantial because 4. There is./ i of as adverse impact on the physical or envvronmental conditions m the neighborhood or districtT 5. The alleged difficulty is/ is not self-created becau 6. In addition the Board £ends that the benefit to the applicant {rom granting the requested variance would h ! 1) / uld be utwei¢hed by (den aD the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare o{the neighborhood or community; ']. The Board also £nds treat the variance request under consideration is tree minimum accessary; 8. The Board also proposes the{]lowing conditions: a� b) , c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. BASED ON TFIE ABOVE FINDINGS I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. 21-2019, Michael � Susan Tartaglione, Introduced by who moved {or its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 30`^ day a{May 2019 by the {ollowing vote: AYES: NOES: