Loading...
1988-02-17 ~ -".-' Q1JEDSBtJRy ZOJlIJlG BOAD 01' APPEALS Regular Meeting Held: Wednesday, February 17, 1988 Present: Theodore Turner, Chairman Charles o. Sicard Michael Muller Susan Goetz, Secretary Daniel S. Griffin Gustave Behr R. Case Prime, Counsel Mary Jane F. Moeller, Stenographer Absent: Jeffrey L. Kelley The meeting was called to order by Mr. Turner at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Sicard moved APPROVAL of the January 20, 1988 minutes. Seconded by Mrs. Goetz. Mr. Turner announced that Use Variance No. 1325, Mobil Oil Corporation, has been tabled by the applicant until March. Mr. Turner stated the procedure of the Zoning Board Meeting: The application will be called by number. The Secretary will read the application. Applicant will come forward to review the application. Public Hearing to be opened/closed. Correspondence/Reports from the Warren County Planning Board. Review the application further with the applicant, if necessary. Approve/Deny/Table application. OLD BIJSllfESS AlBA VAIIARCE NO. 1292 Silver Nail Construction Since there was no one present to represent this project and it has been on the Agenda for some time, Mr. Prime suggested that maybe it is in order to take the item off. Mr. Turner said that at this point Area Variance No. 1292 will be tabled, with a note that the Zoning Department is to communicate with the applicant and find out if the application is to be continued. If not, there will be a formal withdrawal. 1 NEW BUSINESS AREA VARIANCE NO. 1326 Raven Industries Mrs. Goetz stated that house, with a setback of 7 of the required 10 feet, Pilot Knob Road from Route 9L this was for an addition to the front of the feet (on the left side property line) in lieu LR-IA zone. The site is located 1/2 mile on on the left side along Katskill Bay. Mr. Harold Raven, Raven Industries, represented the project. In answer to Hr. Behr, Mr. Raven confirmed that he is not the tenant, but the contractor and represents George James. As Mrs. Goetz was unsure of the site location, Mr. Raven said to go down Pilot Knob Road, go along the waterfront and it is the first group of houses on the left. She asked if there was a mailbox with the name JAMES. Answer: Go in the private road and it is the first house on the right, with a porch on the front. He confirmed that there was a plaque on the front of the house with the owner's name. Mr. Raven confirmed to Mr. Behr that the extension is towards the driveway. The existing house is 7 feet from the property line of the people next door.. and the extension on the front is getting further and further away from the property line, due to the angle as shown on the diagram. Mr. Turner asked about the new addition. Answer: The new addition will become a porch again. done in red cedar. The existing porch will become an extension to the living room and bedroom that are inside the house, and the whole front of the house will be redone. In answer to Mr. Turner's question regarding the roof line, Mr. Raven said it will remain the same; however, the roof line will be brought out, a gable made and an arch put at the entrance. Public Hearing Opened: no comment Public Hearing Closed: Mrs. Goetz read that the Warren County Planning Board approved. Mr. Griffin moved APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1326, Raven Indus- tries. The 12 foot extension is further away from the property line than the house itself. The practical difficulty is that, to keep the existing line of the house, the addition has to be at least 7 feet from the pro- perty line. Seconded by Mr. Behr. 2 USE VAIIABCE BO. 1327 Glen Gregory Mrs. Goetz read mobile homes to be zone. The site is VanDusen Road. that this proposal is for a mobile home park with 11 used for single family, senior citizens, in an L1-1A located on Luzerne Road, approximately 1,000 east of Mr. Glenn A. Gregory represented the project and explained the site as being long and narrow in size. Geographically, given the size and shape, it cannot be used for any other type of building, commercial or indus- trial, plus there is a 30 feet right of way for this land. The mobile home park would consist of 11 units for senior citizens, which would keep the area in a quiet, residential sort of manner, in a neighborly classifi- cation. Each one of the lots are larger than required by the Town of Queensbury. The smallest lot is 6,099 square feet and the largest lot is 7,500 square feet; the town requires only 6,000 square feet. The neighbor- hood was canvassed and there are 20 signatures in favor of the project - all people in the vicinity of the proposed mobile home park. There is one neighbor that would not sign, but said verbally he would not oppose it. We are trying to get the best use out of this land as possible. He ex- plained that he will be retiring in a few years, and this will give good income for Mr. and Mrs. Gregory, who will run the park. Regarding the Niagara Mohawk Power line from Luzerne Rd. to Sherman Ave., he explained that this has become a "dump" site for the Town of Queensbury. It has become uncontrolled in his area, as there are parties, fires and presently it is a fire hazard. The area is thick with pines and debris from the fire in 1962, which could catch on fire and burn very easily. Mr. Gregory felt that this is the best use he and his wife could determine for the land and keep it quiet and a peaceful neighborhood. Mr. Behr asked if Mr. Gregory had discussions with Niagara Mohawk. Answer: No. My lawyer has. Behr: Is there any problem because of the high power? Answer: There is no problem. In fact, they are willing to give me the 25 foot area, which will give 55 feet, enough for town requirements. In answer to Hr. Behr regarding the purchase of the piece of property owned by LaPoint, Mr. Gregory said it is a possibility, but there are no plans at this time. If the LaPoint land is ever purchased, it would not be proposed as part of the park. Mr. Griffin asked if there were septic tanks for each parcel. Answer: Yes. Griffin: Noticed that on the drawing they were right on the line. Answer: Mr. Gregory said that was put in by the engineer. He was under the assumption there was to be a tank and leach field. I am not sure what the town requires. I believe it was one 1,000 gallon tank and two 1,000 dry wells per unit. These would all be situated between units. Mr. Gregory confirmed to Mr. Griffin that the positioning of the tanks 3 would not be as shown on the drawing. Where the tanks are shown will be a buffer zone, remain wooded and the debris would be cleaned up, between my land and VanGuilder. On the backside, the same would apply for the 30 feet between my land and Robert Sanders. In answer to Mr. Griffin regard- ing water, Mr. Gregory said there would be town ~ater from off Luzerne Road. Mr. Prime reminded the Chairman and the Board that if this variance is granted, it goes back to the Town Board for an application for approval. They it is sent to the Planning Board for Site Plan review, which would review all the water, septic, access and location, etc. before it is approved. Then it would go back to the Town Board for permit. So that all the issues that have to do with environment, and so forth, would be addressed by the Planning Board, if this is granted. Mr. Turner asked if the land had been advertised or if the Gregory's had tried to sell it for light industrial use. Answer: No. Because I know that a 50 foot right of way is required, and Niagara Mohawk indicated to my attorney that they would only approved the granting of the easement for this project - not for light industrial or any other use. The reason being that it would protect their property also. Mrs. Goetz asked if this could be obtained in writing from Niagara Mohawk. Mr. Gregory said that there is an existing letter (Page 4A). After reading the Niagara Mohawk letter, Mrs. Goetz said her interpretation was they they did not say it would be allowed only for this park. After the permit was issued, they (Niagara Mohawk) would refer it to the Legal Department. Mr. Gregory said he and his lawyer interpreted the letter as stating that the right of way would be good for the park only. Mr. Turner said that the Board has nothing from the department. In answer to Hr. Behr regarding the fact that it would not be used as zoned, Mr. Gregory explained the reason being is because there is no 50 foot right of way on the highway. Mr. Muller pointed out that there is 3 1/2 acres, yet there is a portion where there is a house, pool and shed. Is that understood to be within the 3 1/2 acres? Answer: No. That is where I live. Muller: So there is 3 1/2 acres of available space and the proposal is to put 11 mobile residences within the 3 1/2 acres. Answer: That is correct. Mr. Gregory further stated that putting in an industrial way it is zone, he does not feel the neighborhood would want in there of that nature. It is a quiet neighborhood now and would "upset the apple cart," with trucks, and so forth. would stay peaceful and quiet. setting the an industry an industry This way it Mr. there is possible curb cut enough. Turner felt that the one thing that hurts the application is that no proof to the Board that a reasonable return on the property is if it is used as zoned. The only demonstration of that is the at the street not being wide enough, and that is not demonstrated According to the Zoning Map, there is a big area there that is 4 ,1" ß " '.·:i.' "; ,;1\ NIAG~RA MOHAWK P~WER C07~AT'ONI1~ W~SHIN~~ON ~VE, PO BOX 591, ALBANY, NY 12201-0591 )Ji (,,~¡¡1' ; "'í _ G lrJ October 28, 1987 James W. Cooper, Esq. Law Offices/Richard L. Newell 14 W. Notre Dame Street Gl~~s Falls, NY 12801 Re: Mr. & Mrs. Glen Gregory Our File: AR-3B8 Dear Mr. Cooper: This is to advise that the proposed easement grant to your clients has been approved subject to certain terms and condi tions. One sped fi c condi tion of thi s easement grant is that your clients should obtain and provide us. with proof of the Town of Queensbury's approval for a mobile home park. In your letter of August 10, 1987, you referred to the "fact that Mr. and Mrs. Gregory are not asking Niagara Mohawk for a favor but are seeking to clarify their record rights to an easement reserved from Niagara Mohawk in prior title". The type of easement that Mr. and Mrs~ Gregory are requesting is not the same as reBerv~d in the deed. The deed reci tea the right ,to cross and recross the property at two points' 25' in width and the points to be designated by the party of the second part, which would be Niagara Mohawk. Niagara Mohawk does not as a general rule allow' for longitudinal occupancy of its property, but rather to allow for the direct crossing underneath of its lines for a property owner to have access from one side of his property to the other. Upon receipt of the requested :Information relative to the Town of Queensbury's approval of this mobile home park, I will submit your client's request to our Legal Department. Appreciating your continued cooperation and patience :In this regard, I remain, Very truly yours, '-ÁCW~J ~~<ULt/ Karen S. Maxwell Staff Assistant Land & Right of Way Dept. KSM:cas 4A _.-.-._--_.-, ._--.- n··_·___·.··_·.·· ,., , ; ''''}C'> ,I i. ,¡~ír zoned parcel doubts. Light aM Industrial utilize the - somebody could buy your parcel and the adjacent land. Answer: It is possible, but I have my Mr. Behr asked if this application could be tabled until such time as new the new plans come out in about 60 days, and review it then to see if there is anything in there that might have bearing. Mr. Prime said that this would be speculating and would not be appropriate at this time. Public Hearing Opened: Support: 1) Richard Phillips; Sanders Road Presented a letter from his mother-tn-law, Olive Green. Confirmed to Mr. Behr that Hrs. Green's property would back onto the property. On behalf of the residents who have lived on Sanders Road for a long time, he wanted to verify that the parties, etc. that were described by Mr. Gregory are something that they would like to be rid of, and that a mobile home park for retired people, would not make any noise, etc. and just their presence there would help. Mr. Phillips said he could not foresee any business that would want to go into that area, because of its location, shape and general vicinity which, except for some junk yards, is totally residential either homes or mobil homes. It is fairly near two major mobile parks and Mr. Phillips feels a small park like the proposed one would have an advantage over a larger one, because it would be small and better kept. The bigger ones have more upkeep. Both Mr. Phillips and his wife are in favor of the application. Mrs. Goetz read the letter from Mrs. Green, which is in favor of the mobile home park (on file). 2) Joanne Hunt; owns property on other side of the pole line Ms. Hunt confirmed to Hr. Turner that she owns 3 1/3 acres, and her house in on Luzerne Road. She is not in opposition to the trailer park. It is a great idea and they need more room for senior citizens. She was concerned about the statement of "single families." Is that including a single family like three people, or is it totally for senior citizens? Answer: It will be a senior citizen park. Single family means that two different families cannot be in one unit. Would there be children involved? Answer: No. Mr. Behr asked if the units would be sold or leased. Answer: Lease the land. They can bring in their own home. Will there be any stipulation as to the total number of people. Answer: The normal family of that age group is three (ie: brother or sister and wife and husband). Mrs. Goetz: Will there be a certain age limit? Answer: 55 years old and over. This would be a stipulation. Mrs. Hunt asked what would happen to the land after Mr. Gregory dies. Can the land be changed over from citizens to something else? Answer: As 5 he understands the law, Mr. Gregory said that once it is established as a senior citizen park, it will stay that way forever. Mrs. Hunt: Even if you sell the property, it will stay as a senior citizen park. Answer: Yes. Mr. Behr reminded that Mr. Gregory only has a certain amount of control over the malicious activity at the power lines. Mr. Gregory said he had talked to Niagara Mohawk and they would permit him to put a fence across the power line. providing he submits to Niagara a gate key. The gates would be on both sides of the property. As an example of the effect of the fencing, Mr. Gregory said that Mrs. Baird on Corinth Road installed fencing and the trespassing has been cut down considerably. Mrs. Goetz and Mr. Griffin questioned Mr. Gregory's statement that the senior citizens' park would always remain as such. Answer: If this is granted and the Town approves it, it will have a permit issued as a senior citizens' park, and it cannot be changed unless the Town itself changes it on their permit. which is renewed annually. The Town cannot do that unless it has gone before a public hearing and the Planning Board. He did admit that it could probably be changed with a lot of legal paperwork. Mr. Behr asked if that could be a stipulation and Mr. Griffin felt that it would be unenforceable. Opposed: 1) Mr. Lee Van Guilder - lives next door. Mr. VanGuilder are four trailer senior citizens 55 VanGuilder presented (on file). does not like the property for a mobile home. There courts around that area and it is enough. As far as and over, he is 55 and has a child 12 years old. Mr. a petition of his neighbors against the application 2) Mr. Nicholson - lives across the street Mr. Nicholson felt that he does not believe in ordinances and that they never should have come into effect. They town never asked the neigh- bors for a vote and feels that ordinances are manipulated by the Town. It is his opinion that the kids who ride on the power lines are the neigh- bors' kids. Granted there are some who do misbehave. He also feels that Mr. Gregory does not have the property to make the facilities properly available. This is strictly his opinion and he is not against him. His views should be taken into consideration. Public Hearing Closed: Mrs. Goetz read a letter from Marion LaPointe, neighbor, indicating that she has no objections. The Warren County Board approved with stipulations (see Page 6A). 6 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING BOARD ~_...--~ Warren County Municipal Center Lake George, New York 12845 T clcµhonc 518· 761·6410 DAT[: February 10, 1988 TO: Queensbury Planning & Zoning Office Town Office Building Bay & Haviland Roads Queensbury, NY 12801 Gentlemen/Ladies: At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board, held on the 10th~_ day of February 1988. the above application for a Use Variance to allow RE: V1327 Glenn Gregory Luzerne Rd., E. of Van Dusen Rd. a mobile home park with 11 mobile homes to be used for single family homes, (senior citizens only). was reviewed. and the following action was taken. Recommendation to: ()() Approve Disapproval ) Modify with Conditions Rèturn Comment: 1ì??Ùé'J,lj 5/ßTeð /71#:/ ÒgCKS, "jj)j)/T/ó/v$, ¿=./C. /Þ./ðtlt.D ONLJ ߣ /JLLt>w.êÒ /15 ¡).Ô2 S/-./7Á1J/1/è¡)J 0/= f-OWN o""~ Qily, ""'~-';:;Q "'"' IÁltI~1 5,j-/}.Nf)/;/UJ~ ,¡CoIl .s£~&?¿/fs Æ ¡Le., V.IO¡¡¿p /3é tzséù? 7#L'Y ,5"40(./t..!J ;3/2 ò£/ßi¿,E¡J ?/hol2 7-ú /1,/J¡'p/¿>OI.J4-( -------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is the policy of the Warren County Planning Board to follow the procedures of the New York State General Municipal Law, Section 239-M, with regard to Municipal Zoning actions that are referred to and reported thereon. The following are procedural requirements that must be adhered to: 1.) The Warren County Planning Board shall report its recommendations to the referring municipal agency. accompanied by a full statcmCI\t for such actions. If no action is taken within thirty (30) days or agreed upon time, the municipal agency may act without such report. 2.) If the recommendation is for disapproval of the proposal, or modification thereof. the municipal agency shall not act contrary to such action except by a vote of a majority plus one of all the members thereof and after the adoption of à resolution fully setting forth the reasons for such contrary actions. 3.) Within seven (7) days after the· final action by the municipal agency having jurisdiction on the recommendations. modifications or disapproval of a referred matter, such municipality agency shall file a report with the Warren Count Planr¡;¡¿ing oard on the necessary form. > Vincent Sp",.r, Vice Chairman OR ('~.~_._~ 6A Mr. Turner stated that, according to the Ordinance, a mobile home park has to be 100 feet from a public right-of-way; and the setbacks are minimum front 20 feet; minimum side 10 feet; minimum rear 15 feet. Mr. Nicholson pointed out that years ago it was different in that area, but now there are mostly homes. Because an ordinance was passed that it was a residential area (ie: Pinewood, Stefany Lane), that is the way the Town wants it. Mr. Turner reminded Mr. Nicholson that it is zoned light industrial and the criteria has to be met for the Use Variance and, if it is not met, then there will be no approval. Mrs. Goetz stated that it was not the Zoning Board that passed the ordinance. In addition, the zoning in the Town is being reconsidered and that the paper should be watched for any hearing. Mr. Nicholson: No one will be able to do anything about it. Mrs. Goetz expressed dismay at that statement. Mr. Nicholson: It is true. Money is going to buy this whole town. The two big money deals that are going up on both sides of the town, it is going to happen. It shouldn't, but it will - unfortunately. Mr. Gregory asked the Board if he has to sell his land to make a reasonable gain. Answer by Mr. Turner: You have to prove that it cannot be used as zoned. Gregory: It has to be sold as zoned. In other words, proof has to be shown that there was an attempt to sell the land. If it could not be sold, then there is proof. Who sets the price? Answer: You do. Hr. Behr stated that it does not mean that the land gets put on the market today and in 30 days say the land cannot be sold. That is not sufficient proof. Gregory: I realize that. Mr. Turner asked Mr. Gregory if he would like to table the application and have the opportunity to provide the Board with proof that the property cannot be used as zoned. Answer: Yes. One question: Can the proof be obtained from an appraiser or realtor, or do I have to effectively put it on the market and sell it? Turner: The land has to actually has to be put on the market. Gregory: For how long, 60 days? Mr. Prime said that advice should be obtained on how to prove hardship. There are several ways to do it. Take time and take it off the agenda at this point and find a method to do it. Mr. Glenn Gregory, applicant, TABLED Use Variance No. 1327, so that proof of hardship can be presented to the Board. AREA VAIIARCE NO. 1328 The Tirehouse Warehouse, Inc. Mrs. Goetz read the proposal for the construction of a new building (5,000 square feet), zoned HC-15. The addition would result in the expan- sion of the tire business. Variance is for the front setbacks and is located at 15 Boulevard. 7 Mr. Jeffrey T. Canale represented the project, who stated that he has prepared a supplemental application for the new plot map, as was approved by the Warren County Planning Board. The original plot plan that was submitted with the application requested a front setback variance from the Boulevard Road for the new storage bUilding. It would have required a variance of approximately 6 feet on the east side; 20 feet on the west side. The concern that was raised at the Warren County Planning Board was the roadway. There was a suggestion and it was passed that the building be moved back 10 feet from the roadway, as originally proposed. This would require a variance not only on the front of the property, but on the back, as it would be within 41 feet of the ,back property, an industrial zone owned by Ciba Geigy, which is about 600 feet from the property line to the River Road. There was some confusion as to whether or not the Tirehouse Warehouse property went back to River Road. Mr. Canale explained that, where the 178 foot back property line is located on the plot map, it is about 600 feet to the River Road. The whole property that is owned by Ciba Geigy is vacant. The required footage, to alleviate the practical difficulty of the use of the land and the hardship on the business, is 40 feet wide. If the building were to be constructed without a variance, it would be 20 feet wide on the easterly side. It is half the space that is actually to be needed for the growth of the business. There is a real problem with the old tires, which were being put out back and create an eyesore. The purpose of the building, the amount of the old tires, and other equipment that needs to be stored require that size bUilding. It improves the quality of the neighborhood and removes the tires from outside the bUilding. Mrs. Goetz remarked about the magnitude of the office. She questioned about the office being regional headquarters. Hr. John McCall, owner. said that there are four other stores in the tri-city area. The main office in Glens Falls is for the other stores. Hrs. Goetz also asked about parking. McCall: The parking will be behind the building, which is not being done now. Mr. Behr wanted to know about tire changing in the building. Answer: Yes. It is retail also. Mr. Griffin: The offices will remain in the original building, and the tires will be changed in the new building? Answer: Yes. There will be four bays and the rest is stor- age no office. The office is about 20 feet away, and the height of the new building is 16 feet. Justin Charles, contractor of American BUilders, said the structure is in two separate heights: four service bays, 40 feet in depth x 40 feet wide; eaves at that point will be 12 feet. There will be a step up to a 16 foot eave at another 3,400 square feet of storage space. The way the building is laid out, there will be two bays into which the cars will pull, and also two bays will be situated as one drives through the build- ing at the exit. The plan is for car circulation. The same is true for bringing and exiting of stock. There will be no exiting doors at the rear of the storage area. There will be a common door between the tire 8 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING BOARD Warren County Municipal Center Lake George, New York 12845 Telephone 518·761,6410 TO: DATE: February 10, 1988 Queensbury Planning & Zoning Office Town Office Building Bay & Haviland Roads Queensbury, NY 12801 RE: V1328 The Tire Warehouse 15 Boulevard Gentlemen/Ladies: At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board, held on the 10th. -- day of February 1988 . the above application for an Area Variance to expand tire business by constructing an additional 5000 sq. ft. storage and tire change building. was reviewed, and the following action was taken. Recommendation to: ) Approve ) Disapproval (X) Modify with Conditions R<~turn Comment: "BL)), S/-/OúL D BE /7)ðv¿ò ð/7Ck /jT t.£/lS7 /0" TO /3L.:" !3IJCK rtl£1//£¿ rKo.f14. H16#wnJ I/VILi mß.£f IA/lfll 73.E/jfAfIÞIC¡j}¡o/IJ COPlI'1. //11 #I1IU'¡'; _ __ _ _ ___ -= _ !.-~!! ~_L!)_ _t~~~':!_ '?!~_ #.!!:~~_ (./y~~!~~!:,__ ~~~ Z1/j~~~ }!fi~ _(¡~ _ _ _ _ _ __ It is the policy of the Warren County Planning Board to follow the procedures of the New York State General Municipal Law, Section 239-M, with regard to Municipal Zoning actions that are referred to and reported thereon. The following are procedural requirements that must be adhered to: 1.) The Warren County Planning Board shall report its recommendations to the referring municipal agency, accompanied by a full statement for such actions. If no action is taken within thirty (30) days or agreed upon time, the municipal agency may act without such report. 2.) If the recommendation is for disapproval of the proposal, or modification thereof, the municipal agency shall not act contrary to such action except by a vote of a majority plus one of all the members thereof and after the adoption of a resolution fully setting forth the reasons for such contrary actions. 3.) Within seven (7) days after the· final action by the municipal agency having jurisdiction on the recommendations, modifications or disapproval of a referred matter, such municipality agency shall file a report with the Warren County Planning Board on the necessary form. OR VillCl'l1l Spitzer. Vice Chairman 9A TOWN OF QUEENSBURY COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNITY BEAUTIFICATION Robert L. Eddy, Chairman 17 Owen Avenue Queensbury, N. Y. 12801 Mrs. Arthur J. Seney, Secretary 8 Queensbury Avenue Queensbury, N. Y. 12801 To r (x) Wal"ren County Planning Board Date r 2/8/88 ( ) Queensbury Town Planning Board (x) Queensbury Town Zoning Board of Appeals (x) APplicant .. variance :fI: 1328 The Tire Warehouse 15 Boulevard We have reviewed the ( ) Other - and have ( ) Approval Res request for J (X) Variance, ( ) Site Plan Review., the following recommendationsr ( X) Disapproval This application has been disapproved by our Committee as data for landscaping, screening and plantings for the above applicant for a Site Plan Review or Variance has not been submitted or is incomplete. Would you please, therefore, refer the applicant to our Committee for approval of its plans prior to granting the application pending before your Board or before construction permit has been granted. You and the Building Department will be notified just as soon as plan~ have been approved by us. ,. Respectfully Submitted, ~ i: (Dll Robert L. Eddy . Chairman The committee is concerned about the disposition of old tires which have been allowed to acumulate in the past, as well 'as with landscaping plans. :,,: 9B change area and functional bay, outside. the very storage area. At this point and time, there is one limited storage on-site requiring renting on the New product will come to the front of the building via a 14 foot larger door. There is also tire distribution from this point. Mr. Charles verified to Mr. Griffin that there would be ample places for cars and trucks. Mr. Sicard expressed concern about the disposition of the old tires. Answer: The old tires will be stored inside and picked up twice a week. Mr. Canale presented a letter from Floyd Helmans stating no objection. Public Hearing Opened: no comment Public Hearing Closed. Hrs. Goetz stated that the Warren County Planning Board modified the conditions (see Page 9A). Beautification Committee disapproved (see Page 9B), basically because of tire storage. Mr. Canale stated that there was some confusion prior to going before the County Planning Board as to the date of the Beautification Committee meeting. Therefore, the applicant was not able to present themselves and address the issue of tire storage, and would have explained that all the tires are going to be removed from outside and stored in the Storage Room. The Beautification Committee was contacted and a meeting has been rescheduled for March 7. Submitted to the Committee was a letter, landscaping application and plot plan (copies on file). Mr. Griffin moved APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1328. The applicant has demonstrated that the practical difficulty is size of the lot. The variance is for a 40 foot setback on the north side and 41 foot setback on the rear and south sides. Also, there is a stipulation that the applicant abide by the recommendations of the Beautification Committee. Seconded by Mr. Sicard. USE VAlIANCE NO. 1329 Joseph G. Regan Mrs. Goetz read that the purpose of this is to use the single family residence for professional offices SFR-I0, at 637 Glen Street. Mr. Donald M. Matusik represented the project. He amended the peti- tion by stating that Question No.3. "Is there an adverse effect on neighborhood character?" should be answered as "No." The owners of the 9 ~" premises are James Shovah and the agent. Mr. Matusik mentioned that he was tardy to the Warren County Planning Board and did not have an opportun- ity to clarify his application. Referring to the Zoning Ordinance requi~ sites, he felt the neighborhood is of a virtually complete business-like nature. There is only one home between Garrison Road and Windsor Drive, which would be affected by an inappropriate use of the property. The front of the house is 18 feet until one would reach Glen Street. The key to the whole application is the uniqueness of the house and the lot size and irregularity. Mr. Matusik said he spent several nights in the home attempting to sleep there, but was unable to do this because of the traffic noise. The house is beautiful and sets itself up ideally for a professional office. The type of office space that is being referred to is a "low-density office" occupancy, with a maximum of three to five cars per day (including a shared receptionist). The parking area that is in mind would be from the southeast corner of the house up to and including one space in front of the garage, providing for five spaces in a west/east direction, plus one space in the current driveway. There are no planned modifications to the exterior of the building and a few minor doorways to be changed in the interior. In answer to Mr. Behr regarding the parking, Mr. Matusik said that the parking will not come further than the one driveway space. The number of spaces will be more than adequate, as there will be one vehicle there everyday and two to four other vehicles, at a maximum. There will not be a great deal of in and out, which means hardly any interruption, not only to the neighborhood, but to the only structure which will have any impact. There is no nearby structure fronting on Glen Street, which has the similar problem; ie: triangular lot or 18 feet from the road edge. As far as the question of that portion of hardship relative to the yield of reasonable return used for the current allowable purposes, cer- tain things have been mentioned which are applicable relative to the almost veritable prohibition of the premises as a single family home. In answer to Mr. Behr's question regarding the attempt to sell the home, Mr. Matusik said there were multiple months and years in attempts to sell the premises as a house and eventually the price became depleted. It was also established that the outside of the home had been renovated within the last two years. Mr. Turner asked how long he had owned house. Answer: Since December of last year. Turner: Was it occupied as a residence? Answer: Yes. Mrs. Goetz: You and James Shovah bought it together? Answer: Yes. Mr. Behr: You bought it mainly to live there? Answer: Absolutely. When it was purchased, we had no thought of turning it over into offices. We had no idea what the inherent problems of the house would be. Therefore, there would be no necessity to inquire as to the current zoning, which we subsequently found out was SFR~10. When Mr. Muller stated that town residents have said that the purchase was intended for commercial purposes, Mr. Matusik said that someone is living there currently. That may have come up after we had found out that it is not suitable for a residence. 10 '-- Mrs. Goetz asked about the three uses for the bUilding. The initial and primary use is twofold. 1) It would be as a financial/planning entity, which involves two persons. These two persons are approximately 80% to 90% in the field and would share a receptionist. 2) Title insur- ance company, of which Mr. Matusik is proprietor. That would include field persons and a part-time secretary, who would be in the office on the average of an 8 to 10 hour week. 3) Investment development entity, which at this point is speculative. The building sets itself up for one office downstairs together with a shared receptionist. Mr. Matusik emphasized again that this is a low-density operation. The upstairs, which he be- lieves has six occupyable rooms, office-wise, and two which are so small that they are only good for storage, would house two entities. In review of the parking situation: 1 car - title insurance entity; 1 car - shared receptionist; 2 cars at the most pension/investments (Mr. Regan's entity). Mr. Behr asked how many entities there would be in which Mr. Matusik would have control/interest. Answer: Of the three that were mentioned, he would have an interest in, if not control of, two. Mrs. Goetz: Are they year round? Answer: Mr. Regan is involved in a similar operation in Florida. The business would be year round, but the occupancy would be infrequent. It is an out-in-the-field, contact-type situation. Mr. Behr: The reason these questions are being asked is because a lot of this is speculation on Mr. Matusik's part, as to how many people are going to be involved. Answer: There have been many inquiries regarding this application; however, no one has been encouraged in order to make sure it stays as a low-density operation. Behr: Regarding the develop- ment company, it would be difficµlt to say how many people would be involved. Answer: Matusik ~aid he is part of the entity (at least 50%) and speaks with confidence. He referred again to the premises on Gar- rison/Windsor. It is the only surrounding structure which is not of a commercial business nature. Mr. Behr was not sure whether the initial interest in the building was to primarily live in, or whether there were long-ranged plans for commercialism. Answer: When we bought the prem- ises, we felt it would make an excellent home, because it is a beautiful building. We bought it in December 1987 and had been attempting to buy it for the second half of the year. Given other circumstances, the non- irregularity of the lot and any other location in non-proximity of Glen Street. it would make a fantastic house. In answer to Mr. Prime, the lot is approximately 6,000 square feet. Mrs. Goetz: You have an office a little ways down Glen Street, so you were familiar with what Glen Street was like. Answer: I have gone by the house many times; however, in my present office which is more than 18 feet away from Glen Street, I hear nothing. Mr. Turner spoke about the house on Garrison/Windsor, which was the Bascom House, had a request in for a Use Variance for professional offices and it was turned down. Mr. Matusik said he was aware of that and pointed out that the house has over 200 feet of depth on a highly residential road. The majority of the useable frontage of the house in question is on 11 Glen Street. Mr. Turner: Have you tried to rent the property? Answer: Yes. We have called several leads and the premises has been looked at by a couple of people, Mr. Shovah has spoken to some people about it, and I have talked to some real estate people. The interest dwindles immediately upon walking in the front door, because Glen Street is literally in "the back pocket." Regarding the widening of Glen Street, Mr. Matusik said there will be some inherent taking away of a certain amount of footage towards each sidewalk. In answer to Mr. Behr regarding the principle entrance, the side door would not be used as there will be no major struc- tural changes and that entrance is into the kitchen. Mr. Prime: Will the parking area be paved? Answer: The safest and most esthetically sound would be to pave as opposed to stone. Prime: Can you meet the perme- ability requirements? Answer: I believe so. Hr. Shovah has looked at that. Mr. Turner: What is the useable square footage? Answer: Approxim- ately 1,800 square feet useable floor space. Mr. Prime: Regarding park- ing spaces, you need one parking space/l00 square feet. 1800 feet - 18 parking spaces. Answer: Mr. Shovah had a plan to remove the garage. Mr. Turner: How long did you advertise? Answer: We contacted several brok- ers, four people to whom the house was shown over a period of approxi- mately 45 days, some of which was before the closing. Mr. Turner: If down the road, you turn it over to someone else, then things change. Answer: As a typical variance, it would run with the land and they could fall back on the residential use, or the non-conforaing use that was sought to be varied and approved. Mr. Muller asked for a description of the house. Answer: Mr. Matusik classified it as a four-bedroom house. There are a total of six rooms upstairs, two of which are very small. Bathrooms: one up and one down. Kitchen: Yes. Mrs. Goetz stated her problems with the house were a serious encroach- ment on residential and the problem of parking. The variance goes with the land. Answer: The essential character of the neighborhood will not be changed. A conversation ensued with Mr. Behr regarding the use of the premises and Mr. Behr's feeling that this is a self-created hardship. Mr. Matusik said that if a viable alternative had presented itself, he would not have entered this application. Mr. Behr felt that the residence can be used as zoned, when Mr. Matusik said it is presently being occupied by Mr. Shovah. Answered: No. Mr. Shovah is there as a convenience to us and a convenience to himself. He is building his own home at present. Hrs. Goetz said she is more concerned about the type of entity that could go in there, if the proposed ones were not there. Answer: Again Mr. Matusik emphasized light-density, professional space. His interpretation is that the ingress/egress into the building, both foot power and motor power (autos, etc.) is a light-density situation. Mrs. Goetz again ques- tioned: Because the variance goes with the land, what would happen if it was sold and a higher density business was put in? That is the reason the doctor's office was not permitted next door. Answer: He did not have a good answer; however, would abide by any conditions that would be set. 12 Mr. Muller expressed concerned about the application standing on its own. In summary, the house was purchased in mid-December 1987; there was an intention to submit the application earlier, but the deadline was missed. After Mr. Shovah's occupancy for several weeks and Matusik's for three evenings, they felt there was no question that the building was a nonresidential situation. Mr. Turner: It might take longer than three/- four evenings to get used to the traffic. Mr. Matusik again tried to confirm what the hardship is on this piece of property and no other that is similarly zoned. After two/three weeks of ownership, it was decided that this residence has a hardship and that it can never be used for which it is zoned. Mr. Muller felt he would feel better about the application, if there had been a long history of troubled opportunities to use this piece of property as zoned. Nothing has been said about that. We agree it is a high-traffic area. Mr. Muller did not feel that a "For Sale" sign had been up for a period of years. The Board has heard nothing about the dollars and cents proof. If Mrs. Locke had been asking a large amount of money for the property because she felt it was qualified, but no one else did, then that would tell why it did not sell. If you and Mr. Shovah paid a commercial value for the property, that also would tell something. Mr. Matusik agreed. Mr. Muller further analyzed the pieces of property with which a comparison is being made, and felt that it is bounded on all of its sides by similar uses (residential). Not across the road where there is commercial. Mr. Matusik disagreed, as he felt the homes on Glenwood have virtually no bearing on what will be done. After some discussion regarding the surrounding homes, Hr. Muller emphasized that the point he was making is that there are non-commercial, non-professional, consistent uses with the zone right in the area. Mr. Matusik disagreed again stating that his position is that the proposed site is surrounded by commercial uses. Mr. Muller: Regarding parking, the parking schedule requires 17 or 18 spaces, and that there are six spaces accounted for without a customer in the bUilding. Mr. Matusik introduced Mr. Larry Reynolds, real estate broker and appraiser, who was retained to do an appraisal and review on the property (see Pages 13 A - D). Mr. Reynolds explained that the value of a property can be determined by its use, for whatever it is zoned, and that his inter- est in this property was to try to write a valuation of the house as a residence. This is done by either a market approach, reconstruction cost approach or capitalization approach. The market approach is the most pre- ferable and accepted way. With older homes, the reconstruction cost rarely works. Primarily what is looked for is the condition of the house; ie: physical deterioration, physical or functional obsolescence, anything that would be curable or incurable. The main thought about the house, which is about 65 to 75 years old, is that the character of the neighbor- hood was different then than it is now. Any adjustment that would have to be made on the initial valuation price of the house, would have to con- sider the location, economic obsolescence, which is incurable and cannot be changed. This house has been negatively affected by conditions that were out of anybody's control, including the zoning. From a broker's standpoint, this is a house on a corner lot next to a busy highway. In 13 APPRAISAL FOR PROPERTY ßELONGING TO: Donald M. Matusik 611 Glen Street Glens Falls, New York TOWN OF QUEENSßURY COUNTY OF WARREN 55.: STATE OF NEW YORK LAURENCE M. REYNOLDS, BEING DULY SWORN, S^YS: That he resides at 2 Prospect Street, Lake George, New York; That he is a licensed Real Estate Broker, License 118/+3790; That he is associated with an owner of Dialllond Point Associates whose place of business is located at Lake Shore Drive, Diamond Point, New York; That he has been actively engaged in the real estate profession for over ten years; That he has appraised property for all purposes throughout Eastern New York State, more particu- larly Warren, Washington, and Schenectady Counties. The subject property is located in the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, fronting on the East side of Upper Glen Street (NYS Route 9). The property is improved by a two-story single family residence wi th detached or1(~-car garage. 13A .C· , . -~',.~-.. . ,~......,.......,'~' ~. ALL THOSE TRACTS OR PARCELS OF LAND, situate, lying and being in the Town of Queensbury, County of Warren, State of Ne.w York bounded and described as follows: ALL of the lands and premises lying between Upper Glen Street, Windsor Dr i ve, G lenwood Avenue a nd lands of [(ngue, hr> ing La ts #1, #27, the south one-half of #26, the west one-quarter of the north one half of #26 and part of Lot #25, all lying be- tween the Plank Road (now Upper Glen Street), the Road to the Brick Yard (now Glenwood Avenue), and Avenue (now Windsor Drive), aU as sho\vn on 'vlap made by Hiram Philo, Nay 1, 18<)9 and fiJ(~d L n Old F i 1 C' Pia n Boo k No.2, p age .l4 L~ i [1' t Iw \~ ¿¡ r r e n Co U 11 t Y C L (\ r k ' s Office. BEING part of the premises described in a deed to lIe.len [vI. Bascom from J. Seward Titus and H. Guy TitLls by deed dated Noveluber 22, 1943, recorded in the Warren County Clerk's Office Nov(~llIber 2Lf, 19¿fJ, in Book 226 of Deeds at page 327 and also a deed from Ruth Titus and Edith Titus Russell to Helene N. Bascom dated November 24, 1943 and recorded in the W.Jrren County Clerk's Office December 2, 1<)43 in Book 226 of Deeds at page 378, and being all of the premises conveyed by Fred J. Hovey, Lnc. and Carolinc II. Pierce to Helene M. Bascom by deed dat(~d ~Iay 2, /950 and recorded in the \'¡arren County Clerk's Office [Vlay b, 1l))0 in Book 287 of Deeds at Page 238. J':XCEPT LNG AND JŒSEnVING TIŒREFRON all tha t cer ta in piece and [)LH-cel of l.1nd conveyed by the party of the first part to Wi.lliam P. Cates by deed dated May 17, 1982 and recorded August 24, 1982 in the Warren County Clerk's Office in Book 640 of Ueeds at page 333 .Re f ere nce to \vhich deed is here by made for a maC(' pa r t.lcu- lar description of said exception. J3~[NC a part of the premises conveyed by Frederick G. Bascom to Betsy Nias Hasmussen by deed elated November 22, 1977 nnd rec.orded in the \-Jarren County Clerk's Office on November ?2, 1977 in noük GiG of Deeds at page 159. 13B The ¿'_~ling is of frame construction with horizontally ..-Allied vinyl siding, spt all a stone foundation. Thel:'e is approximately 2200 squ<1t."e feet of finished living space. 1he age of the structure í.s over 60 years. 'the roof lS of slate. WindO\vs are double-hung type with alum i mUll combin- a tion s tonus and screens. 'the first floor has a kitchen, laundry room, dining room, living room and bedroom. 'the second floor has five (5) bedrooms and a full bath. The kitchen has wall-hung wood cabinets, laminate type counter tops and stainless steel sink. 'nle floor is covered with sheet vinyl and the walls and ceilings are of gypSLUTI board. '[he"! living room, dining room and bedroom have harchvood floors and gypsum board walls émd ceilings. 'lhe stairway to the second floor is of wood and open in design. 1h0 second floor bnthroom has vinyl sheet flooring, a cast tul> with fiberglass tub surround. Floors on the second level are of hardwood, walls and ceilings are of gypsum fJOard. There is a closed stairway returning to the kitchen area. lhere is a full attic with bonded cellulose insulation in the floors. lhere 1S a full baselllent with a concrete floor. Domestic hot water is heated by a 52 gallon gas-fired hot water heater. Central heat is supplied by a gas forced air furnace. t-1unicipal services include streetlights, nntural gas, city water and city sewer. 'lhe primtll:"Y factor affecting the valuation of the subject property as a single family residence is economic obsolescence, defined by the State Board of Equalization and Assessment as "Always incurable and an external influence which detracts from the value of a site and hence the structure which is affixed to the site. A prime example would be a residential property which is adjacent to a large industrial facility." 13C I I' Doubth___ the character of surrounding properties was dif, ~ ent \...hen the structure \VlIS originally built. However, since the structure's construction, :, Clen Strpct, particularly in the Town of Queensbury, has changed to primariLy eO/lllflt~rcial uses. The mœt recent traffic count (1985) by the State D(~partrnent of Transportation shO\vs an annual average daily count of 19,LIOO vehicles passing by the frollt of the structure. COlUncrcial uses (see attached map) are located within 100 feet to the north, east and west of the property. Conveyances of portions of the property over the years as indicated by older maps ml:! deeds hé:lv(! ler't the dw~ll Lng en an irregulary shaped p<lrcel. 'l'he above-mentioned facts must be considered negative factors for residentiaJ. VLI)uatioll purposes anri more than satisfy, in the opinion of deponcnt, the paLéuneters defining economic obsolescence. Of the streets intersecting Glen Street in the City of Glens Falls and the r, 1'O\.;n of Queensbury in the vicinity of the subject property, fifU~en (15) of r the 11 intersections have had one-time single [(UniJy residences located 011 í i. the corner converted to professional offices. The pattern of properties of this type a::; undesircable o\YI1er-occupied resi- " I ucnces is to be rented as a one-frullily at a base rate because ot its location. , , I As the return is marginal at best after maintenance and taxes, the structure inevitably deteriorates. Tlw conversion of these comparable properties to slilall profcHsionaJ offices ì; is probably the only reason that the structural and architechund, inte?r.ity of the original buildings have been retained. ! : A capi t'llization npproach to the value of the subject propert ,IS a rentaL would indicate a valuation of approximately .1;52,000. ^ market approach to I value is difficult as there arc no comparable sales of single félCilUy resi- dences located on corner lots on Glen StLC'et though the same E;tructuœ in a , residential neighborhood could be valued at between $30,000 - ~;100,OOO. I, I 13D 1985, the DOT survey showed an average daily count of 19,400. Regarding the intersections into Glen Street, there are a lot of older homes which have been converted into small offices, which is not unique to Glens Falls or to corner properties. Invariably, if it is less than desireable as an owner/occupied residence, which is true now than when it was built, what happens is that when it is rented to someone and it is not particularly desireable to stay there a long term with change of condi- tions, it also ends up being at the entry level or base rate from a standpoint of being able to rent it. You can always rent a single family as a single family. When you talk about reasonable rate of return, it implies that by ownership of the house you ought to, by living in it and enjoying it or renting, be able to provide for at least the maintenance of the property, if not an outstanding return. The pattern over the years, with this family's record, is that out of the 15 or 16 intersections looked at in the area, there we~e all but two that were converted into some type of offices. The only reason the houses are maintained as well as they are is because the businesses that have gone in, without exten- sively altering the characteristics of the neighborhood, have retained the individuality of the bUilding to their benefit. There is a great deal of diminishing utility with this particular property, by the fact of the specific location. The main entrance of the house is on Glen Street and not on Windsor Drive, which is the kitchen entrance. Mr. Reynolds made a definite point that this residence is not even remotely prime residential property, and that the utility of the house is the function of the house itself and not who owns it. That house cannot be considered comparable to any house even 50 feet away in the neighborhood. The only thing that is similar to the houses down the block on Windsor is that they are zoned the same. Again, the main factor used here is what is defined as economic obsolescence which is, by nature, incurable. Mr. Muller asked that, when arriving at a valuation of this particular piece of property, no similar sales were found? Answser: Yes. Putting a value on this was difficult. Muller: In comparison of this piece of property, did you take into account its close proximity to the residential uses that are of some value? Do they enhance the value? Answer: As a residence? If they are the only reason to the value of the residence. The fact that the house next door and the ones to the north are there. When I am in the house, I can see the house next door, then I see JoJo's and Cole and Price Chopper and Friendly's and Sunoco. That is all. With the possible exception of the upstairs, you might be able to see through the trees. Mr. Muller also referred to the portion of Mr. Reynolds' report regarding the capitalization approach, which would indicate a valuation of approximately $52,000. Hr. Reynolds: Capitalization is where an accept- able rate of return is taken and it is worked backwards. Normally it is used for multi-family or commercial. I was using for rent somewhere about $400 per month. Taxes are about $1200 to $1300 per month. 14 Mr. Matusik confirmed that the taxes assessed for the two lots run about $31,700. In answer to Mr. Behr's comment regarding the altering of the character of the neighborhood, Mr. Matusik feels that the essential character, which includes all structures, will not be changed. Mr. Prime stated that the ordinance provides for a buffer of 50 feet between a residential use and a commercial use. That cannot be done here. He asked Mr. Matusik if that alone would alter the character of the neighborhood. Answer: Mr. Matusik asked Mr. Prime if this should be changed to an Area Variance. Answer by Mr. Prime: No. But you cannot meet the criteria of the ordinance in any respect by making this commercial. And, if it is made commercial, it does alter the character of the neighborhood because a commercial spot is being put in a residential zone that does not mee the setback and buffers. Matusik: This depends on the interpretation. Public Hearing Opened: For: no comment Opposed: 1) Herbert Wetherby - 4 Garrison Road Lives in between Windsor and Garrison, across from the subject pro- perty. Mrs. Goetz read a letter submitted by those opposed to the application (on file). Mr. Wetherby confirmed that the subject land is part of the Hovey Land. He further stated that, upon deed transfer, Mr. Hovey stated that the land was to be used strictly for residential, not commercial. Documents of proof were presented to the Board. Further conversation regarding this topic took place at the dais. Mr. Wetherby expressed concern about the children that play in the Windsor Drive area, and it is no place for a commercial parking lot. 2) Elizabeth Wright - 11 Windsor Drive Mrs. Wright explained that the reason she bought her house in that location 2 1/2 years ago was because of the quiet, residential location. She feels that the Town of Queensbury is fostering the neighborhood to remain as such, because there is a planned park on Glenwood Avenue, single family homes on Glenwood and Windsor Drives. Windsor Drive would be greatly affected by having a business on the corner, as it is difficult presently to exit from Windsor onto Glen Street. She feels it would start a "domino" effect and requests the Board not to grant the variance. 3) John Beebe - 2 Ft. Amherst Road Mr. Beebe also is concerned about the "domino" theory. He does not feel the house is obsolete and, if the subject house becomes commercial, then the house next door becomes obsolete, and so on down Glen Street. Mr. Beebe is the third house in the "domino" theory. Mr. Beebe said he bought his house with his eyes opened, but feels Mr. Matusik bought the subject house with his eyes closed, until the closing. Mr. Beebe also 15 spoke about buffering between commercial properties. He strongly feels that the house was meant to be a residence and that eventually a buyer will come along, who will use it as such. 4) Douglas Armstrong - 7 Windsor Drive He purchased the house November 17, 1987 because the people on the street are something very special and regards the area as a "utopia." He strongly feels that Mr. Matusik had no intention of using the house as residential. Mr. Armstrong asked how much furniture is in the house now as when purchased. Answer: The same amount, quite a bit. Mr. Matusik corrected Mr. Armstrong by commenting that he never had any intention of moving into the house. Mr. Armstrong, however, still feels Mr. Matusik never had any intention of using the home as residential, and that an attorney who deals in real estate would know what the situation was that he was getting into, when he bought the property. Mr. Armstrong also stated how dangerous Windsor Drive is for traffic, especially during the snow season, and felt that Mr. Matusik cannot guarantee five cars per day. Mr. Armstrong paid $72,000 for his house, which is 15,000 square feet and asked Mr. Matusik how much the subject house cost. Answer: That is not pertinent to the record. Mr. Armstrong: It is pertinent to the record because Mr. Matusik is saying that the house is obsolete now as a residential. Mr. Armstrong feels that the agent paid more for the subject house than the Armstrong's paid for property that supposedly is a nicer piece of property. Mr. Armstrong feels that not being residential will hurt the property, and feels that $109,000 is the price. Mr. Matusik rebutted that the more he paid the more reasonable rate of return he is entitled to. Mr. Armstrong also stated that he was disappointed that a man of the court made some statements that Armstrong feels are totally inac- curate. 5) Lisa Armstrong - Windsor Drive Lisa is 15 1/2 years old and expressed concern about the safety of her little sister and other children playing on Windsor Drive. 6) Mary Ann Beebe - 2 Ft. Amherst Drive The neighborhood is characterized as residential and not commercial. The map that was provided with the application is slightly unobjective, in that it shows very little of the surrounding residential neighborhood. Most of the impact will be on the residential areas, and not the com- mercial entities across Glen Street. It will hurt them as far as privacy and neighborhood character goes, but it will hurt the value of properties. Mrs. Beebe also asked about the purchase price, because she feels that is the only way a hardship can be assessed. She also stated that, when Mr. Matusik purchased a residence further south on Glen Street, he said that there would only be one business situated in at that location, but shortly thereafter there were four. It is difficult to know how extensive the proposed businesses are going to be. 16 Mrs. Beebe verified that the children do use the street and they need protection. She also differed with Mr. Reynolds regarding professional offices located in homes on Glen Street. There are some different zones, and the areas that do have offices are virtually an office/house, which is required. The primary use of those homes has to be for residential pur- poses. Farther south on Glen Street there is a different zone, which has changed the character of the neighborhood. Mrs. Beebe presented a letter from Tupper Limbert, 17 Garrison Road, who stated opposition to the variance (on file). 7) Joyce Thompson - 12 Garrison Road Expressed opposition to any changes in the single family zoning law, and is concerned about the traffic on Windsor Drive and Garrison Road. Construction of new homes in the area are completed in good taste and have improved that character of the neighborhoods. There also has been improve- ment in the commercial buildings. She feels that cars for the proposed commercial venture will park in areas other than the assigned driveway. Mr. Matusik thanked the Board and those in the audience for their time and comments. He did confirm that the purchase price on the building was $109,000, with closing costs as $3,500. Mr. Matusik spoke about the home- work that was done before he purchased the property. He felt that it was a good purchase and that, if they could not find a suitable tenant, there would be no difficulty in transferring it as a single family home. In disagreement with the audience, he feels that he has met the three-prong test for this residence. Regarding the crowding of Windsor Drive, he said the parking spaces would be recessed from the street. He agreed that he does own offices on Glen Street, but mentioned to Mrs. Beebe that his var- iance does allow more than one office. He stated that he would not invade the privacy of the children on Windsor Drive. Referring to counsel's statement regarding setback, Mr. Matusik said he would like to work with counsel in that area. He feels that he has done nothing to create the circumstances, but t~at the circumstances were created by attrition, erosion, etc. Mr. Armstrong stated that he is a licensed real estate agent and, at the time this house was purchased, there were two other properties very close in proximity, that were on the market for $75,000 each. It is inconceivable to him that someone would pay $109,000, which was the asking price, unless they were thinking in terms of commercial value to that property. Public Hearing Closed: Mrs. Goetz read a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Spring, 8 Windsor Drive, objecting to the variance (on file). 17 Warren County Planning Board disapproved and the Queensbury Committee' for Community Beautification disapproved (see Page 18 A). Not only was the Committee concerned about landscaping plans, but was interested in the parking solution at the location. Mr. Muller reviewed the deed and does not believe there is a restric- tion that the subject area is limited to residential use. Each piece of property is different, so he does not want everything to be based on what happened in 1982. He agrees with the Beebe's regarding the "domino" effect. What is across the street is Plaza Commercial use. Other variances have been approved in that area because we (the Board) are shifting a little bit of Commercial Use within the Plaza Commercial. The subject building has been a private residence for 65 to 75 years, and is a very familiar site within the Queensbury/Glens Falls area. Windsor Drive is not a street that non-residents use and, in fact, is a collection of pot holes. The applicant is considering changing the traffic pattern, in order to accommodate the required 18 parkings spaces, or a portion thereof if approved. The' land is 1/7th of an acre, with the facade facing Gìen Street, which is the buffer with commercial usages across Glen Street, and it is also used as a buffer in terms of the residential uses on Windsor Drive. Glenwood is moving up with its improved environment, the Wetherby residence is zoned residential and is restricted residential by its deed. There has to be a buffer of 50 feet, not necessarily a planting, but with this application that could never be. Mr. Muller did not agree with Mr. Matusik that this variance would have no impact on the neighbors. It has no impact on Cole Muffler (that is why they are not here), no impact on Inside Edge, no impact on Fire- stone, no impact on Sunoco. Everybody on whom the variance has impact is here. The fact that it is a neatly-shaped piece of property, it is uniquely-situated piece of property (Plaza Commercial across the street and on a state highway) are reasons why variances are approved. Some reasons why variances are denied are that the applicant cannot get a buf- fer, cannot get adequate parking, diminish residential uses to the left and to the right, diminish the use of Windsor Drive as residential. Mr. Mueller moved DISAPPROVAL of Use Variance No. 1329, Joseph G. Regan, because of the adverse affect upon the neighborhood. There are variances from the ordinance that are monumental. This is approximately 1/7th of an acre, and the parking requirements entail a tight situation. There would be a serious deleterious impact on Windsor Drive. Economic hardship is sold as zoned. There has been testimony that it was purchased for $109,000, in December of 1987, with the clear knowledge of the present zoning. Seconded by Mr. Turner. 18 TOWN OF QUEENS BURY COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNITY BEAUTIFICATION Robert L. Eddy, Chairman 17 Owen Avenue Queensbury, N. Y. 12801 Mrs. Arthur J. Seney, Secretary 8 Queensbury Avenue Queensbury, N. Y. 12801 To. (x) Warren County Planning Board Date. 2/8/88 ( ) Queensbury Town Planning Board (x) Queensbury Town Zoning Board of Appeals (x) APpli cant " Re. Variance #1329 Joseph G. Regan Corner Glenwood Avenue & uppef ßlep We have reviewed the request rorslx Varlance, ( ) Site ( ) Other - and have the following recommendations. ( ) Approval (x) Disapproval Plan Review., This application has been disapproved by our Committee as data for landscaping, screening and plantings for the above applicant for a Site Flan Review or Variance has not been submitted or is incomplete. Would you please, therefore, refer the applicant to our Committee for approval of its plans prior to granting the application pending before your Board or before construction permit has been granted. You and the Building Department will be notified just as soon as plan~ have been approved by us. . Respectfully Submitted, (""/1J/~f// ¿: vi~7L. -- - - ' (í Robert L. Eddy Chairman Not only was the committee concerned about landscaping plans but was interested in parking solution at this busy location. :., 18A IJSE VAllIARCE NO. 1330 AlBA VAl.IA1CE NO. 1331 Lawrence and Pauline Durkee Mrs. Goetz stated that this proposal is for a single family residen- tial dwelling, NC-IA, located on the east side of Route 9L (Ridge Road), approximately 170 feet north of County Road No. 39 (East Sunnyside Road). Paul M. Wasserman represented the applicants and stated that the property has been on the market for over a year and has not been able to sell. There is a buyer, Mr. and Mrs. Johnson, who wish to make use of the property as residential. It is an open, empty lot and a home would be built on it. In addition, there is genuine hardship as a result that, if there were a failure to grant the variance, the Durkees would not be able to meet certain financial obligations. Mr. venture Bardin's Merrill, Wasserman confirmed on either part of Store (across the neighbor. to Mr. Behr that there is no commercial the property. Mr. Hartin Lemery, owner of street), has no objections, nor does Mr. Dean Jean Jones of Jean's Realty, offered information regarding the pro- perty. The Durkee's listed the property with Ms. Jones in August 1986. It was and still is a hardship. In August 1981, Ms. Jones sold to Dean Merrill the property which is the boundry on the north side of the subject property. Selling and marketing the property was never quoted as being in a lA zone, because it does not show that on the current zoning map. The Durkee's backyard is what is now being sold. In answer to Mr. Prime, this is not a subdivision. Ms. Jones confirmed to Mr. Griffin that the ingress and egress would be off Ridge Road. When talking about a Use Variance, Mr. Wasserman said that it would be much safer to use the property for residential rather than commercial/residential purposes. The elevation is about 12 feet or higher. He also stated that it would be extremely hard to see a structure from the road. Mr. Turner asked if Mr. Durkee could have an egress on Sunnyside Road. He said he could ask Mr. Durkee that question and get back to the Board. At that point, Mrs. Goetz asked and Mr. Behr suggested that the variance be tabled, pending the answer to the egress question. Mr. Griffin differed and felt that there was no problem with an entrance on Ridge Road. Ms. Jones said that Hr. Durkee owns 17 feet on Oneida Corners Road that he does not wish to convey. Mr. Wasserman said that the way the property is shown on the map is the way the owners would like to have it sold. In addition, Mr. Wasserman said that what is being requested is a use that is substantially less hazardous than if the land were to be used as zoned. 19 Mr. Turner felt that the zoning on the application should be Neighbor- hood Commercial _10 not Neighborhood Commercial lA. Mr. Wasserman and Ms. Jones said that one of the problems from the outset has been determining exactly how the parcel is zoned. It was not correct on the tax map, and an inquiry had to be made after the sale was consummated. Ms. Jones ex- plained the difficulty and confusion in getting the correct zoning from the Building and Zoning Department. Mr. Behr requested a refund of $50.00, since the applicants were incorrectly charged for two variances; however, the policy of the Building and Zoning Department is not to refund monies paid for applications. Mr. Griffin said he felt the application met all the requirements of a Use Variance. In answer to Mr. Turner, Mr. Wasserman said it had not been advertised as NC-1A, but as property for sale. Public Hearing Opened: no comment Public Hearing Closed. Mrs. Goetz said that Warren County Planning Board approved. Mr. Griffin APPROVED Use Variance 1330. The approval is based on the following. 1) One of the questions for a use variance: Is there a reason- able return if used as zone? Answer: There would be no reasonable return. The property was on the market for over a year with no sale. 2) Unique- ness: It is totally surrounded by residential. 3) Neighborhood Charac- ter: This use will not change the neighborhood character. An additional comment noted that Area Variance 1331 was not required, as the zoning was Neighborhood Commercial 10,000, not Neighborhood Commercial lA. Seconded by Mr. Sicard. Chairman Turner adjourned the meeting at 10:45 p.m. ~ . ~ Tnedore Turner. ~ Chairman Minutes typed by Mary Jane F. Moeller, Stenographer 20