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: