Loading...
1989-05-24 ~-''----" -----.~" QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS REGULAR MEETING MA Y 24, 1989 INDEX Use Variance No. 24-1989 Stephen Britton 1. Area Variance No. 51-1989 Anthony Russo 3. Use Variance No. 52-1989 Marvin Dobert 6. Area Variance No. 53-1989 Cobe, Inc. 8. Area Variance No. 54-1989 Tropicana Restaurant 9. Use Variance No. 55-1989 William Lawrence 10. Area Variance No. 56-1989 Larry Necessary 17. Use Variance No. 57-1989 Greater Glens Falls 19. Warren County Board of Realtors Area Variance No. 58-1989 Neal Hubbell 20. Area Variance No. 59-1989 Thomas Rudell 21. Area Variance No. 60-1989 Glens Falls Cement Co. 22. ------ -- QUEENSBUR Y ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS REGULAR MEETING MA Y 24, 1989 7:38 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT THEODORE TURNER, CHAIRMAN SUSAN GOETZ, SECRETARY CHARLES O. SICARD JEFFREY KELLEY DANIEL GRIFFIN MICHAEL MULLER JOYCE EGGLESTON TOWN ATTORNEY-PAUL DUSEK LEE A. YORK, SENIOR PLANNER JOHN GORALSKI, PLANNER PAT COLLARD, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NEW BUSINESS USE VARIANCE NO. 24-1989 SR-30 STEPHEN C. BRITTON 125 CRONIN ROAD FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW BUILDING BEmND EXISTING BUILDING FOR THE PURPOSE OF HOUSING EQIDPMENT AND MORE SHOP SPACE. EXISTING SHOP SPACE WILL BE CONVERTED TO OFFICE SPACE. TAX MAP NO. 59-3-14.1 SECTION 4.020 LOT SIZE: 1.69 ACRES STEPHEN BRITTON PRESENT MRS. GOETZ-Read the June 19th, 1985 minutes from the previous Variance No. 1001 that was granted. STEPHEN BRITTON-Presented two pictures to the Board, (1) One of the building as it was when purchased, (2) One of the building as it is at present. Stated that in the last three to four years the business has expanded with new machines, at present five people are in the office, its overcrowded this is a necessity for us at this time. With the rules and regulations of the storage and transportation of explosives we are completely piled up with paper work which has to be stored for five years. In regard to explosives, it gets tougher and tougher every year to be in this business. We have to buy new blasting machines and various other machines with the space that we have now there isn't enough room. MR. TURNER-Stated that he was granted a variance to have an office and maybe park some trucks there, but you have more than trucks there you have equipment there of all kinds. You were never granted a variance for that you never sought a variance for that. STEVE BRITTON-For the trucks I was granted permission. MR. TURNER-Not for the equipment. STEVE BRITTON-That's correct. MR. TURNER-Stated that he has a heavy construction site in a SR-30 zone. MR. KELLEY-Asked if he had an alternative to move some of the equipment off site to another place? STEVE BRITTON-Has checked into moving up into the airport this was my first preference, but everything has been sold. MRS. GOETZ-Asked why he let all of the equipment stay there? STEVE BRITTON-We put package deals together now and what we do is that people want prices for you to do the drilling and the blasting, before we just sold them the explosives, and sold them a service of putting the explosives in the hole and doing the blasting. As time has changed the equipment got so expensive the competition in the industry as a whole we starting putting package deals together therefore the people that we used to supply who used to drill their own wholes got out of the business basically forcing us if we wanted to stay into the business whether to find someone to do it or do it yourself. In this industry it is a lot easier if you have the control and to do it yourself. MRS. GOETZ-Asked if it ever thought that he shouldn't of been letting this happen is a residential 1 '-" ~- zone? STEVE BRITTON-Not sure that is was a residential zone. Lee Hendry, was probably one of the first people on the street when we bought that property and I bought it from him. He mixed chemicals there and it was an light industrial, light commercial property. He was in there before zoning appeared. MR. TURNER-Stated that it was a preexisting nonconforming use. STEVE BRITTON-Asked if that meant he was grandfathered? MR. TURNER-If he was there. STEVE BRITTON-Said that someone told him that a variance doesn't apply to the next person who buys it. MR. TURNER-Stated that he had a change of use. It reverted back to residential use when you bought it. STEVE BRITTIaN-Because the property changed hands it locks back to. .. If he was there before it was zoned residential how could. . . MR. TURNER-He lived there first, and built the building next. STEVE BRITTON-Stated that when he bought the property from Mr. Hendry, his lawyer looked it up, and it was zoned light industrial, light commercial. Then I was told that because the property changed hands that it reverted back to whatever the new zone was. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED BRIAN CLEMENTS-Representing himself, wife, children, Marwan and Susan Kozak sister and brother-in-law, their children, neighbors Mr. and Mrs. McAuliffe, Mr. and Mrs. Dolan, Mrs. Bishop, and other concerned residents of Cronin Road, Ridge Road, and Meadowbrook Road. STEVE BRITTON-Asked to have his application withdrawn. BRIAN CLEMENTS-I think that I would like to continue and maybe we could skip over the questions, however, their are some other questions here that I would certainly like to get settled and resolved. MR. TURNER-He is withdrawing his application. BRIAN CLEMENTS-I have some information on the original variance that was passed that has not been conformed to. I think that their are environmental concerns there, I would like to somehow asked that some of those concerns be addressed by this Board, and possible the New York State Environmental Conservation. MRS. GOETZ-Is this something that we deal with? PAUL DUSEK-I think that this is the wrong form. I think that this is designed for the Zoning Administrator, and the concerns involving the Department of Environmental Conservation. BRIAN CLEMENTS-Would like the summary included in the minutes. SUMMARY A)Request for denial of current variance application for the reasons listed below: B) Request for enforcement of compliance to previous variance (IDOl of June 19th, 1985) for the reasons listed below: It was understood by the residents that the original variance 1001 passed in June, 1985 allowed the property and building to be used only for office space, and that parking of vehicles would be limited to office personnel, except for occasional stopping of Britton Trucks (not tractor-trailers) and for the sole purpose of picking up or dropping off "paperwork", and at no time would any trucks be permitted on the property while carrying explosives materials (see highlighted sections of Zoning Board minutes 6/19/85). Since this has not been the case, and because of the blatant missue of the variance granted in June, 1985 the residents respectfully request that: (1) "The Board" deny the current application for variance and (2) that the following conditions be met and enforced by the Queensbury Zoning 2 -- Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury, the Building Inspector of the Town of Queensbury, The Warren County Sheriff's Department, and/or The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation: 1) removal of all vehicles and equipment and allow parking for office workers and/or administrative personnel only. 2) removal of ALL flammable, combustible, polluting, hazardous, and explosive materials and containers housing or previously housing the above mentioned materials including but not limited to: gasoline, fuel oil, drilling oil, lubricating oil, diesel fuel, plastic explosives, firing caps, and any other hazardous, polluting, combustible, and/or contaminating materials. The residents contend that there has been: (1) a detriment to the health and safety of the children and general public, (2) contamination of the land, water, and wildlife at the site, and (3) a serious negative environmental impact to the area. Because of this, the residents are concerned about the possible future contamination of their water wells, the health of their families and neighbors, and the future possibility of devaluation of their own homes and properties. MOTION TO WITHDRAW USE VARIANCE NO. 24-1989 STEPHEN BRI'ITON B:_Y REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT., Applicant withdraws application for Use Variance No. 24-1989. He understands what variance he was granted on June 19th, 1989 by the Zoning Board of Appeals. He will be pursuing other alternatives. AREA VARIANCE NO. 51-1989, HC-lA ANTHONY RUSSO APPROX. 1/4 MILE NORTH OF ROUTE 149 ON ROUTE 9 FOR DEMOLITION OF EXISTING CLOSED TAVERN. FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A RESTAURANT AND FAMILY RECREATION CENTER. THE PROPOSED PROJECT REQUESTS A 20 FT. INSTEAD OF A 25 FT. REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW FOR A DECENT FLOOR PLAN. THE REAR OF THE BUILDING OVERLOOKS A POWER LINE RIGHT OF WAY AND SEEMINGLY WOULD HAVE NO EFFECT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 34-2-1.2 SECTION 4.020 K, REAR YARD SETBACK LOT SIZE: 1.33 ACRES MAP SHOWN TO BOARD HOWARD KRANTZ REPRESENTING MR. RUSSO/DENNIS FRANKLIN ENGINNER AND DESIGNER/MR. KING ARCHITECT/PHYLLIS HOLTZ REALTOR MR. KRANTZ-The original application was made for an area variance for a rear setback. Their was discussion for a parking variance, and the examination of the Zoning Ordinance, and other issues it isn't appropriate at this time to address that issue. Would like to adjourn or postpone the second request which had to do with parking. The present building is in poor condition. Mr. Russo is under contract to buy the property he does have the right to renovate and restore the existing structure, but it is in poor condition and would rather not do that. He is asking for a 20 foot rear setback that is called for in the Zoning Ordinance. The application says a 5 foot variance is required there are going to be only 2 other sections. The southern end of the building the setback is only 2 feet and one foot at the north, but it does go as much as 5 feet in the center of the building. In the back is Niagara Mohwak's right-of-way, believes their is a transmission line through there no neighbors. Went before the Warren County Planning Board, they recommended approval. MR. SICARD-Asked if the Niagara Mohawk line comes up to your property line? MRS. HOLTZ-it comes up to the end of the property line (referred to map). TAPED TURNED PUBLIC HEARING OPENED GEORGE STARK-Owner of Mohican Motel, would like to know what they mean about family entertainment center, what does this involve. MR. KRANTZ--It is going to be family pool and billards. There are similar ones in the Albany area. Showed to Board where the snack bar is going to be located. MR. STARK-What are the hours of this? MR. RUSSO-The hours will be approximately from 11:00 a.m. 2:00 a.m. MR. KRANTZ-The applicants need site plan approval. 3 '----- MR. STARK-Is this a franchise? MR. RUSSO-No, not at all. MARILYN STARK-Opposed to the project, it is located directly across from our motel. I feel that it would detrimental for the 2:00 a.m., closing time for the quietness that we seek for our business. We've had experience with it previously, the property owners closing at late hours, I feel that the late hours will be detrimental for us. MRS. GOETZ-What do you feel would be reasonable for hours? MRS. STARK-Midnight. I feel that the traffic up there is horrendous it is noisy as it is even without any business being available or opened at that hour. It is hard enough to conduct our business even without something across the road. We've also had problems with people coming across the street using our facility. I hope that this would not be a problem. MR. KRANTZ-I can appreciate Mrs. Stark's, experience with Mr. Chips. This is not Mr. Chips, this is a new owner, with a new business, and would hope that the sins of the former business is not going to be visited upon the new owner. It is in a highway commercial zone. Mr. Chips, was a bar serving alcoholic beverages. Mr. Russo has already stated for the record that their will be no alcoholic beverages and all the problems that would come with it. All the required facilities and amenities will meet the Queensbury Zoning Ordinance. I can appreciate Mrs. Stark's, concern for her business, but likewise the owner of this property is entitled to reasonable operated their business. MR. TURNER-It is a permitted use in the zone. MR. KRANTZ-Again, Mr. Russo does want to be a good neighbor and doesn't want any problems with the neighbors. ROBERT CARROLL-resident of Queensbury. I am not opposing the plan, but I would like to know if we can demand assurance from the applicant as to what kind of protection he is going to afford in his place of business at a late hour in the morning that will prevent drug problems of this area. We have had a tremendous amount of them and they seem to be drawn to all of these arcades and other places where youngsters can hang out. The pool and billard room is a great draw for that type of condition. I think if it is possible that some demand should be made for him to produce some sort of document for the guarantee of a certain amount of security to prevent drugs from going in and out of those places, because it is a gambling place for kids and at 2:00 a.m. in the morning in a secluded area like that I think you will see more of it, we have enough of it up here. MR. TURNER-I can understand what your saying, but that is not before us. MR. RUSSO-I've been in business now for 10 years. I have a place on Long Island, we are looking to relocate up here into the area and open the same new business. As for my track record on Long Island, I have never had any problem with any drugs. Mr. Carroll, just stated that there are drugs up here, of course, drugs are a big problem today. Drugs can be found in a high school, a outing, any place where young people go. This poll hall is not going to bring any more drugs into the area. My experience in running a billard pallor, the knowledge of running a billard pallor, the control and management will be assured for them. MR. KRANTZ-I would like to add that Mr. Russo, has plans on relocating and has bought a home up in this area. This will be a second residence for him and hopes the business is successful to make this his home. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED STAFF INPUT Notes from John Goralski, Planner, (On file) CORRESPONDENCE Warren County Planning Board approved. Beautification Committee disapproved, because they didn't appear. DISCUSSION HELD MR. KRANTZ-Stated that no one received notification. When at the Warren County Planning Board this was brought to our attention. After they recommended approval they were to send me a copy of that and Inever received it. 4 '---- MR. RUSSO-Talked with Mr. Eddy, and we are suppose to meet in June. MR. SICARD-Asked how many employees are going to be employed? MR. RUSSO-At least 8 to 10 people. It all depends on the business. MRS. EGGLESTON-Asked that at his biggest turn out what does he estimate would be the amount of people involved including spectators? MR. RUSSO-If it is an exhibition you would have more spectators. If it is a local competition probably about 50 to 60 people would compete. MRS. EGGLESTON-Asked what was the plans for spectator parking? MR. RUSSO-Stated that you really don't get that much as far as spectators you get more players than you would spectators. MR. KRANTZ-Stated that for this reason that they are going back to study the issue of parking. MR. GRIFFIN-Asked if a restaurant facility was proposed? MR. RUSSO-A snack bar. MR. GRIFFIN-Asked about alcoholic beverages? MR. RUSSO-Stated that it is a New York State Law, you are not permitted alcohol in a billard pallor. MR. TURNER-The design of the building will limit the capacity of the building. PAUL DUSEK-What is being requested is a 5 foot variance from the setback from the sideline. Thinks that the applicant has to demonstrate to the Board that he is in someway going to be harmed by the municipal ordinance. I haven't heard any reasons given by the applicant as to how he is going to be harmed if he is forced to stay in compliance with the ordinance. Encouraged the Board to look into this a little more, and focus on the 5 foot variance and what would happen if he doesn't get it. MRS. GOETZ-Asked what would happen if he didn't get it? MR. KRANTZ-One possibility is to rehabilitate the existing structure which would not need a variance it would be a prior nonconforming setback. MR. FRANKLIN-Stated without the five feet it reduces the marketable area by 18 per cent. MR. KRANTZ-This is a long narrow lot. MR. FRANKLIN-The jog in the property line is what we have to deal with. We are asking for five feet that is the new area in the middle. This is for economic reasons. PAUL DUSEK-The issue that has been raised concerning night hours etc., the Board has to make determinations to whether that certainly is a public health safety welfare argument that has been raised. I think that you have to make a decision now as to whether you feel that those are related to the five foot variance issue, or rather related to something else. The law generally requires that they come forward with their proof, and then the Town in turn is obligated to come forth and prove that their are some community welfare type problems that deal directly with the variance issue. MRS. GOETZ-Can we recommend that that be taken up with the site plan review? PAUL DUSEK-If this is what you feel. MR. TURNER-Thinks that since the scope of the review is the site plan this belongs before the Planning Board, feels that this would be incumbent on them to review the whole thing. PUBLIC HEARING OPEN GEORGE STARK-I don't want the Board to misconstrue, I really don't have any objections to this. I think they should grant the variance for the 5 feet in the back so the building can go back further that portion of the property is very narrow. It is to anyone advantage across the street, down the street, to have this building back as far as it can be wider entrances etc. 5 -- I don't have any objection to the variance. Thank you PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED DISCUSSION HELD JEFFREY KELLEY-Asked what was the purpose of the space in the front, what is the width of the space? MR. FRANKLIN-Thinks it is four feet. JEFFREY KELLEY-Asked if he could explain the purpose of the walkway and why it has to be verses bringing the building forward? MR. KRANTZ-Believes this is an observation area. The reason why the walkway is elevated is to have site distance down rather than being level. MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 51-1989 ANTHONY RUSSO,lntroduced by Daniel Griffin who moved for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard: Applicant has demonstrated practical difficulty the lot is narrow. The request is for a maximum of 5 feet relief on the rear setback, it varies anywhere from 1 to 5 feet on the back; this is the minimum relief; there will be no ill effect on the neighborhood. The short EAF form shows no negative impact. Duly adopted this 24th day of May, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Griffin, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Turner NOES: None ABSTAIN:Mr. Muller ABSENT: None USE VARIANCE NO. 52-1989 CR-15 MARVIN S. DOBERT 52 MAIN STREET CORNER OF MAIN AND RICHARDSON STREET AT PRESENT: OFFICE FOR HEATING, AIR CONDmONING AND REFRIGERATION SALES. PROPOSAL IS TO ADD AUTOMOBILE LEASING AND RELATED USAGE. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 131-5-19 SECTION 4.020-1 LOT SIZE: .4 ACRES MARVIN DOBERT PRESENT MR. TURNER-Asked Mr. Dobert, to explain the automotive leasing on the related use? MR. DOBERT-The operation involves about 10 automobiles of which normally 7 or 8 are out on the road. This is designed just to be a sales facility to promote the leasing of automobiles and to turn the automobiles around to perform first. . .on maintenance. The related usage the things that are typically involved in a small garage in that nature first echelon type business. MRS. GOETZ-Asked if the related usage will go on inside this garage? MR. DOBERT-Yes. Has contracted to buy property, presently leasing it with an option to buy so that the money that I'm putting into it is primarily for beautification and is an an attempt to make it desirable in appearance. The properties involved are the three lots 19, 20, and 21. On the front the frontage is 125 feet, the frontage on Richardson Street is 125 feet. Lot 20, and 21, is about 150 feet deep. Their is a acre of land there in total. There will be no bodywork done, no engine changes, nothing associated with junk automobiles, we have everything to gain by having a good appearance. This is his sales office for the refrigeration business. MR. KELLEY-Asked if Mr. Dobert, was going to be running this business? MR. DOBERT-Supersaver will be running this. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED STAFF INPUT 6 -- Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner, (On file) CORRESPONDENCE Warren County Planning Board, disapproved. ( On file) He wasn't able to attend this meeting. DISCUSSION HELD MR. MULLER-Asked if a 50 foot buffer would be required? MRS. YORK-Their is only a buffer required between changing zones, not between change of uses within a zone, but the Board may wish to consider this. MR. GRIFFIN-Asked about the septic system? MR. DOBERT-Measured the parking area which we are now using it is about 30 feet from the edge of the highway. The sewer line is about 45 feet we are not going to be positioning the septic system. I would agree to limiting the parking area to 30 feet, this would leave a 15 foot buffer between the septic tank. MRS. EGGLESTON-Asked if he was applying for a variance in completion of enlarging what you've been doing, or will the operation stay the same as it has been in the past? MR. DOBERT-It will stay basically the same. MR. GRIFFIN-Asked how many vehicles would be out front? MR. DOBERT-Shows on diagram room for 6 vehicles. There is a lot of space out back it goes 125 feet to the east. MR. KELLEY-Stated that part of the problem is that this particular zone that is the existing residential structure is only 15,000 square feet and you say that you already have a heating and air conditioning business. Thinks that we would have a second use this is part of the use variance, he has to show that its not setting forth a reasonable return the way it is now. MR. DOBERT-When contracted to buy the property two years ago it was zoned highway commercial. Had intentions of setting up the commercial lot ratio. The income for this sales office does not support the debt load for the property. MRS. EGGLESTON-Asked if he was part of the leasing corporation that is going to run this? MR. DOBERT-I am part owner of it. MRS. GOETZ-Asked if he was saying that part of his hardship is the change in zone? MR. DOBERT-The change in zoning is to allow for the commercial operation. Didn't realize this was not allowed. MRS. EGGLESTON-Asked what his hours of operation are going to be? MR. DOBERT-8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, Saturdays 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., these are my posted hours. BRIEF DISCUSSION AMONG BOARD MEMBERS MR. MULLER-Asked how many parking spaces were needed for the other business on the site? MRS. YORK-Retail would require one space for each 100 square feet of gross floor area, he has 800 feet in his retail office, he would be required to have 8 spaces for his retail sales. If its wholesale he needs one space for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area plus one space for each company vehicle. This is difficult because of the uniqueness of situation. MOTION TO APPROVE USE VARIANCE NO. 52-1989, MARVIN S. DOBERT,lntroduced by Michael Muller, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Susan Goetz: We believe in answering the questions to support granting this variance that the applicant has demonstrated that he would have difficulty realizing a reasonable return on the property as used. There is a 2 bay garage with a lift, to deny him this use would be to deny reasonable 7 .-' -- use of the property. He has demonstrated that the circumstances show that the lot is unique there is an existing structure ready to provide the proposed business. He has demonstrated that there is no adverse effect on the neighborhood, no neighborhood opposition. The use is consistent and compatible with the present use and they will be using duplicate services. The ZBA has interpreted the definitional section of the ordinance and has said, that there will be one parking space for every 1000 square feet of building for the present and the proposed use. We have reviewed the EAF form and their seems to be no negative impact. Duly adopted this 24th day of May, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Griffin, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Muller, Mr. Turner NOES: None ABSENT:N one AREA VARIANCE NO. 53-1989 COBE, INC. 5 SMOKE RIDGE ROAD, OFF SHERMAN AVENUE, 1 MILE WEST OF 1-87 TIllS VARIANCE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW THE OCCUPANCY OF THE 670 SQ. FT. APARTMENT, WillCH IS 80 SQ. FT. LESS THAN THE 750 SQ. FT. THAT IS REQUIRED BY SECTION 7.078 OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY ZONING ORDINANCE. TAX MAP NO. 121-10-17 SECTION 7.078 LOT SIZE: 21,827 SQ. FT. RAY COWEN REPRESENTING COBE INC. MR. COWEN-Stated that the building permit was issued April 7, 1988 not 1989. The apartment is new and unoccupied until we are issued a C.O. This is designed in accordance with the New York State Fire Protection Code. In September, went to the Town and submitted revised set of plans to them, and explained what we were doing. MR. KELLEY-Stated that the requirement is 750 ft. square feet. Feels their was a basis as to why this square footage was arrived at verses some other square footage. Asked why did they pick this particular number? MRS. YORK-Stated that with the development of the current ordinance this was brought over from the past ordinance their was no discussion on it. Can't explain how these numbers were arrived at. MR. COWEN-The State Building Code, show us to use minimum dimensions for giving room rather than establish square footage room, and talks about egress requirements for side. . ventilation and ceiling pipes, etc., this doesn't meet all of those requirements. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED STAFF INPUT Notes from John Goralski, Planner, (On file) CORRESPONDENCE Letter from Pat Collard, Zoning Administrator, stating that this request should be for an area variance. This parcel is located in an approved subdivision for 2-family homes, therefore, no use variance is required. (On file) MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 53-1989, COBE, INC.,Introduced by Jeffrey Kelley who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Turner: Applicant has shown that the intent when the building was built was valid. Their was a change in plan and that he actually moved in and changed the floor plan resulting in an apartment that was created 80 square feet less than 750 square feet required by the Ordinance. This is unique in that it is a habitable building, it has all the amenities for living it is just smaller than required. To make it a conforming apartment it could be a personal hardship and diminish his own living space. It is not detrimental to the neighborhood there will be no outward change in the appearance of the building. It will make the applicant able to realize the reasonable return on his investment. The EAF shows no negative impact. Duly adopted this 24th day of May, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Griffin, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Muller, Mr. Turner 8 ~--- NOES: None ABSENT:N one AREA VARIANCE NO. 54-1989 TROPICANA RESTAURANT DANNY LOMBARDO ROUTE 9, DmECTLY ACROSS FROM THE "LOG JAM FACTORY OUTLET". EXIT 20 , 1-87, TURN LEFT ON ROUTE 9, t MILE FROM EXIT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN 18 FT. BY 24 FT. CONCRETE PATIO ON THE FRONT OF THE RESTAURANT, 30 FT. FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. TillS WOULD FEATURE OUTSIDE DINING, ROUND TABLES WITH UMBRELLAS, MA TCIßNG CHAIRS, ETC. THE 2 APPLES TREES IN FRONT WOULD BE INCORPORATED IN THE DESIGN OF THE PATIO. TIllS WOULD BE USED FOR LUNCH AND EARLY EVENING DINING-NOT FOR LATER ENTERTAINMENT, NO BANDS: MUSIC. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 35-1-1.1 SECTION 4.032-33 (75 FT. SETBACK REQUIRED) LOT SIZE: 2.44 ACRES DANNY LOMBARDO PRESENT MR. LOMBARDO-Addressed the chief reason why Warren County Planning Board disapproved this project. They said it was to close to the road. Feels that this is not the case 30 feet from the road is not to close to the road. If you drive through Lake George Village, Saratoga, Frank's Pizzeria, proceed south to the Trading Post, they have outside patios close to the road. Stated that he has a lawn in front of my building, this is a perfect place a patio, I don't feel its to close to the road. MR. TURNER-Stated that the use is not allowed by the definition. MR. LOMBARDO-Feels it should be granted, he is not asking for anything more than what's in the area already. This would allow me to take full advantage of the lunch business. MR. TURNER-Explained where the definition started from. Their was a lot of input from the Advisory Committee, the idea of consuming alcoholic beverages outside of the establishment was not the criteria that they wanted to follow. TAP TURNED MR. MULLER-Stated by the application the practical difficulty you are seeking the relief from the setback requirement, what is the setback requirement? MR. TURNER-50 feet. MR. LOMBARDO-I'm seeking a 20 foot variance. MR. MULLER-You have to demonstrate some practical difficulty, such as the dimension of the lot, it is causing you some restraints. You also have to show that you have investigated some other feasible alternatives and found none. MR. LOMBARDO-Stated that he has parking on both sides of the building it is impossible to put a patio out there. The lawn in front of the building is a perfect place to put a patio. MR. TURNER-Asked if this was more of an exposure amenity here to put this out front so everyone can see it to draw the people. MR. LOMBARDO-Yes. MR. TURNER-This is not a reason for granting a variance. You have the situation where you have the exposure to the highway to bring the people in, and shoppers in . . .if this was around on the side or back you wouldn't have that kind of exposure. MR. GRIFFIN-In front of the building right now there is a trellis from the lattice work which is about 4 feet from the building there is a planter this is roughly 12 feet then it goes all the way across the front of the building about 80 feet, asked why couldn't that existing use this existing building? MR. LOMBARDO-I was planning on doing that if the use variance was granted. MRS. GOETZ-Asked if this was on the diagram, why didn't you show tables if you were planning to do that? MR. LOMBARDO-I was going to seat them out there first, could use this as a backup possibly. MR. KELLEY-Asked about the size of the overhead trellis area? 9 ~ --' MR. LOMBARDO-It is 12 feet to the planter from the edge of the trellis area. MR. KELLEY-Feels that their is alternatives to this. MRS. GOETZ-Stated that it is 30 feet back here (refers to map), the proposal is for 18 feet, you would have to go back 2 more feet which is your trellis area. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED STAFF INPUT Notes from John Goralski, Planner, (On file) CORRESPONDENCE Warren County Planning Board, disapproved (On file) Queensbury Beautification Committee, disapproved (On file) MOTION TO DISAPPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 54-1989 TROPICANA RESTAURANT,lntroduced by Michael Muller who moved for its adoption, seconded by Daniel Griffin: The applicant has other feasible alternatives to a open patio, for instance the 12 foot by 80 foot existing deck could be used for this. The variance sought was substantial in relation to the Ordinance requesting a 30 foot front setback from the 50 foot front setback requirement of 20 foot relief. Duly adopted this 24th day of May, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Griffin, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Muller, Mr. Turner NOES: None ABSENT:N one USE VARIANCE NO. 55-1989 SFR-IA WILLIAM E. LAWRENCE 900 FT. NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF MEADOWBROOK ROAD AND CRONIN ROAD ACROSS FROM GIRL SCOUT CHAPTER ON MEADOWBROOK ROAD FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A RECREATIONAL FACILITY: GOLF, DRIVING, RANGE, BATTING CAGE, SPEED THROWING, GAME ROOM, PROSHOP, NO AMUSEMENT RIDES. TAX MAP NO. 46-2-9.4,9.5 SECTION 10.040-B LOT SIZE: 19.5 ACRES RICHARD MCLENITHAN AGENT/MR. LAWRENCE PRESENT MR. MCLENITHAN-Stated that Mr. Lawrence, is under contract to purchase the property from Mr. Sundberg, the contract is not continent upon the action of any municipal body. MR. LAWRENCE-Explained to the Board what is proposed. The property is approximately 20 acres, its very wet. Hadsomeone look at this to see if you could put a house on it, the contractor suggested that it would probably take 4 to 5 feet of fill on an acre to put a house. The cost would be to great for me to put a house on it. Thought it would be a good idea to place a driving range on it which is a seasonal thing. Feels he can fill this by digging three ponds, their is a pond already there, would like to enlarge it and add two more ponds. I would have to haul in some fill, but not as much as I would need for housing. I am using a 50 foot buffer zone all the way around the property except on Meadowbrook which is 25 feet it will be treed, I won't touch any trees, I will be adding trees to the area. On the driving range would like to build three greens on the range so you have targets to aim at. I would like to put in a cutting range. This is based on golf this is the primary use of the land. Would also like to have an option for batting cages. I am proposing a small game room and a snack bar. MR. TURNER-Asked about the arcade, what is going to be in there? MR. LA WRENCE-I am proposing video games, just 6 games. I don't want an arcade, I do not want a hangout. MR. TURNER-Feels that this isn't going to be the case with Regency Park Apartments being so close. 10 -' -- MR. LAWRENCE-The main thing I want is the golf, if the game room is a problem I can do with out it. MR. TURNER-Asked about lights on the course, what are the hours of operation? MR. LA WRENCE-7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The lighting will be on the driving range and parking area. In the parking area 75 to 100 feet apart, the driving area for the tees, they are 50 feet apart, 25 feet high, aiming out over the golfing area at 50 yards, 100 yards, 150 yards. Their shouldn't be any light going into the housing because of the 50 foot tree zone. MR. TURNER-You mentioned that you couldn't develop this as SFR, because it requires to much fill. Asked how much fill he is proposing to bring in for his course? MR. LA WRENCE-Couldn't say. MR. GRIFFIN-Asked if isn't wet in there? MR. LA WRENCE-Their has been a 100 year flood plan, and 500 year flood plan. MR. MCLENITHAN-Stated that with the definition of wetlands, this certainly is a wet area. MR. TURNER-It is wet, but it can be developed for SFR. MR. MCLENITHAN-Its a practical problem. MR. TURNER-Asked if he denied this? MR. LAWRENCE-No. MRS. GOETZ-Asked him why he thought he could put something like this in a SFR zone, which is the most restricted type use? MR. LA WRENCE-To raise the land up to a point to put a house on it would cost to much money. MR. TURNER-Asked if his intentions were to exercise the contract if the variance is denied? MR. LAWRENCE-Yes. MR. TURNER-Asked what he was going to do if the Board denied the variance to put houses in there? MR. LAWRENCE-No. Not sure what he would do with it. Couldn't afford to haul in enough fill to put a house on it. MRS. GOETZ-Stated that this sounds like a nice proposal, but in another area. MR. TURNER-Stated that this would alter the character of the neighborhood, there would be a traffic problem, kid problem. MR. LA WRENCE-I have a piece of property that I can't afford to build houses on, but I can afford to raise them up to cut grass so its dry enough to get some golf balls down. MR. TURNER-Stated that he said he can't afford to build on it, you haven't told me that its not feasible that it can't be built on. MR. MULLER-Stated that the problem was that he was asking that 19t acres is sought in a residential area. . . MR. LAWRENCE-I'm only using 14t acres including 5 or 6 acres in the buffer zone around the property. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED JIM PIPER-Meadowbrook Road, one lot from proposed plan. Mr. Lawrence states that he has worked and been around golf courses for a long time. Pretending that there is a 50 foot buffer all the way around this that amounts to a little over 16 yards, how far can you hit a golf ball sir? MR. LA WRENCE-I can hit a golf ball, I can hit a lot more than 16 yards. MR. PIPER-That's correct. If a ball comes slicing off that tee off area it is probably going 11 -- -- to be in my pool in the back yard. MR. LA WRENCE-The tee off area is almost 200 feet, your property goes in 100 feet? MR. PIPER-136 feet. MR. LA WRENCE-It would be impossible for someone to hit a golf ball on your property. MR. PIPER-I've seen an awful lot of golf shots. . . Fifty five parking spaces, right now the speed limit on Meadowbrook Road in that area in 40 miles an hour. If you increase that 55 cars 40 miles an hour, your looking for an accident waiting to happen. The Town addressing the speed limit in that area its entirely to many cars. MR. LA WRENCE-Its 55 parking spaces only because I don't have any other use for that much property this is why I wanted to make it all parking lot. MR PIPER-If you had enough space you would put 200 spaces there if you just didn't have any other need for it, so technically you would put 200 cars in there because you have parking. If you got the spaces and people have the time their going to use them. MR. LAWRENCE-It would be great if its filled up, that would be wonderful. MR. PIPER-For you it would be great, for me it wouldn't be so great. Your talking about the hours 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., I believe is what you've said? MR. LA WRENCE- Yes. MR. PIPER-At what time are you going to pick the golf balls up, I persume after you close 10:00 p.m. at night? MR. LA WRENCE-No, in the morning. MR. PIPER-Prior to 7:00 a.m. in the morning, so your talking about some type of equipment running prior to 7:00 a.m. in the morning. MR. LA WRENCE-Golf balls can be pick up during the day while people are hitting. MR. PIPER-Suppose you have a big crowd that are in there until 9:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. at night then your going to be running equipment after 10:00 p.m. at night. MR. LA WRENCE-Not necessarily. MR. PIPER-Then it will be prior to 7:00 a.m. in the morning, to pick the balls up. MR. LA WRENCE-They will be picked up during the day. MR. PIPER-So there will be no equipment running prior to or after 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.? MR. LA WRENCE-It would have to be mowed. MR. PIPER-A residential neighborhood, I think this is a commercial venture that has no business in a residential neighborhood. MR. LAWRENCE-If I could say, a tractor would make the same or less noise of any mower that would happen in any residential area. Its not illegal to mow before 7:00 a.m. in the morning. There is a 50 foot buffer zone of trees and a lot of line could on back in here (refers to map), before if ever even got near your house. Your house would be from the mowing area quite a distance. MAR Y ZIBRO-Manager of Regency Park Apartments, on the corner of Cronin and Meadowbrook Roads. I object to this because we have more than 100 children that I know would be attracted to that. MR. LA WRENCE-What would they be attracted to? MRS. ZIBRO-They would be attracted to the video games, they would be there. MR. LA WRENCE-If I didn't have the video games? MRS. ZIBRO-They still would be there. MR. LA WRENCE-What would they be doing there? 12 - --- MRS. ZIBRO-It is very close to our property they would wonder off and would be up in that area. MR. LA WRENCE-Its not a hangout~ MRS. ZIBRO-Most of the traffic there, we have 296 units there now, we have more than 300 cars coming in on Cronin and Meadowbrook intersection, we have a stop sign there now, at this point its quite dangerous. That's a nice country road and a lot of our tenants enjoy taking a walk up there. MR. LA WRENCE-If if was a residential, 20 house on this property you would still have a lot of traffic. The difference between 20 house there and the traffic that would have, and the traffic that this business would have a great number of difference. MRS. ZIBRO-With the type of operation your planning on is going to draw and entirely difference type of person your going to get a lot more young people. It does not mean 20 homeowners. MR. LA WRENCE-I would almost disagree with that. Most of the people are in their 20's, 30's, or 40's, their not teenagers, teenagers go the miniature golf I see a lot of teenagers playing miniature golf. MRS. ZIBRO-I can assure you that if this ever goes through you would have 100 kids there everyday, we're close so they could walk up there in a few minutes. MR. LA WRENCE-It is a wonderful thing to have a place for kids to go. MRS. ZIBRO-I'm sure it is, but it also creates a lot of problems. MR. LA WRENCE- My problem is to manage the kids that are there, but I do not want a hangout believe me. Its nice for kids to have a place to go, where are they going to go to play on Bay and Quaker, to ride their bikes. MRS. ZIBRO-I don't know, but the parents take them different places. When they come home from school the first place they would head would be up there. MR. BRENNEN-151 Meadowbrook Road. I have no objection to your offer to have some free membership up there, even though I am the resident in the lower left hand corner. I think what Mr. Piper, was trying to say, and I agree with him with your experience in golf you know that a little over 16 yards is nothing. The negligible factor. . .of 50 feet. MR. LA WRENCE-I've seen pro's. . . MR. BRENNEN-Well your not a pro and either am I. Apparently from the way your trying to buy this, I asked your the hours in the hallway in front of your Attorney, Mr. Lenithan, you didn't know. I said what are your hours going to be, you said I don't know what do you want me to make them to be. It appears to me that the whole list that I've got in front of me that you'll agree to anything that anybody wants here instead of coming in with a plan. I think we all know the living area okay, that this area is environmental sensitive as you yourself well know. I would like to know is the State Environmental Quality Review Act being followed? Could a full environmental impact statement be needed? Can you answer that for me? MR. LAWRENCE-Part of that I can answer for you. I have talked to a few different people from D.E.C. they decided as long as I stay 50 feet from the stream the Meadowbrook Creek, Halfway Brook, the tributary. MR. BRENNEN-Okay. MR. LA WRENCE-They don't have any jurisdiction. MR. BRENNEN-Your saying that all the flow comes from the green area up in the upper right hand quad? MR. LA WRENCE-No. MR. BRENNEN-You just said that. MR. LAWRENCE-The tributary does flow this way, and the creek flows this way (refers to map), the creek is much bigger than the tributary. I said the tributary is what I believe makes this very wet. 13 -' -.- MR. BRENNEN-If I could for an example, (refers to the map). For everybodies purposes here. This is the creek that flows through here and the water flows right around the back. The only reason that I mention that is because, I think this little equipment barn that you've got right in the back of my buffer zone, which I probably will not hear the first thing in the morning when you either mow the grass or collect your golf balls, that you are going to have to repair equipment, you are going to have to start it up, just like I have to start my lawn mower. The bottom line is that water is going to be flowing off from that direction over towards you, but the fill that your going to be putting in there is now going to block and send that water right back into me. The natural flow of that water will come in towards you which I don't think you really understand. You may have walked it, you haven't lived it. MR. LA WRENCE-Ever time it rains I go there, and I see how. . . MR. BRENNEN-Every time? MR. LAWRENCE-Well in last 2 weeks. MR. BRENNEN-Were you there today? MR. LA WRENCE-No. MR. BRENNEN-It rained today. MR. LAWRENCE-The biologists that I've talked to said, that the water does seek its own course. Whatever fill that the building is sitting on the water would come up to that and then continue on. MR. BRENNEN- It will seek its own for about 3 days hopefully it goes into your range, now your going have a problem with getting your balls, its a matter of how much fill. . . MR. LA WRENCE-Yeah, it does get wet in the spring when it floods out. . . MR. BRENNEN-You have Ii inches of rain, I don't care if its the middle of summer, the spring, the winter. MR. BRENNEN-I understand that. What's your thoughts on vandalism? MR. LA WRENCE-On vandalism. MR. BRENNEN-No increase? Traffic you kind of check the box there as minimal increase in traffic so the other people that happen to live in the area seem to think that have expressed their opinions already. Vandalism what would you check the box minimal, next to none. MR. LA WRENCE-I don't think my customers would be bringing vandalism into the area. MR. BRENNEN-No one said you were, I said what you think about vandalism, as a result of those people that your not going to advertise, your not going to try to bring them in, your not going to use any marketing strategy to bring them in? MR. LA WRENCE-Yes. MR. BRENNEN-In effect your going to be a big light bulb saying. . .come here. If your outside and their are flies and mosquitoes around this light and your put the light bulb up there did you induce them or no? MR. LA WRENCE-Yes. MR. BRENNEN-I know their there, but you induce them into my area didn't you? MR. LA WRENCE-I don't understand how this would attract vandalism. MR. BRENNEN-This is human nature its all over even when you induce that there. . . MR. MCLENITHAN-Mr. Chairman, I think it would be appropriate for Mr. Brennen, I think his point should be made directly for the record as he wants to make it. MR. BRENNEN-My point on the record is that I'm totally against it for reasons stated. ROBERT CARROLL-lives in Regency Park. I think to ask you one question. If you were allowed to do all this and fill in this whole place would you take a i acre and build a house on it, would you live on it? 14 ----- MR. LA WRENCE-Am I planning on living on it? MR. CARROLL-Would you live on it? MR., LA WRENCE-If you filled all that in and got your little amusement park, would you then build a house on it and live there? MR. LAWRENCE-No. MR. CARROLL-Why not? MR. LA WRENCE-I don't want to, but where? MR. CARROLL-Why wouldn't you live on this save t acre and build a house, and live right in the middle of that like the rest of us. MR. LA WRENCE-I would live there, I would live anywhere around there. MR. CARROLL-I've been living on that road since 1986. It used to be fairly quite then we got a storage place, the guy across the street from me is violating the law everyday their is a commercial operation going on in the back, trucks going in and out of there everyday. The kids going up to the college are short cutting through the street its a drag strip. They don't watch the stop sign, I pulled a kid off his bike the other day 10 years of age he almost got hit by a speeding car going through there. Your attraction would draw hundreds of cars, kids hanging out there. I am a retired police officer I know what these joints drag in. You say you may have all the good intentions of the world I'm going to do this and that, but you guys don't do it. You have everything in there you got drugs, you got. . .you've got everything. The kids are playing on the games, their batting balls, you don't draw in the 40 and 50 year old's, you brought in the youths, the 16, 17, 18 year old's that hang out there. MR. LA WRENCE-I have to disagree with that. MR. CARROLL-I don't care what you disagree with I know what these things. . . If you go up along Route 9, and you go out along Route 149, put something like that out there it doesn't belong in a residential area. I am totally against it, I live with it everyday of the week, and I live on Meadowbrook Road, its a mad house with cars and trucks we don't need anymore. MR. LAWRENCE-The customers that go to a driving range I don't believe they are going to be racing around. A lot of golfers have families, they understand kids their cautious people. I don't see a problem. Yes, people do say their going to do things and they don't do it, their is nothing that I can prove to you that I'm going to run a professional operation its just a matter of having confidence and trust. I have the knowledge and experience, and I do want it to be a professional place. MR. CARROLL-As Mr. Brennen said you didn't come here with a plan you still haven't the plan. Everything that we say you go the other way and you have no plans on how to control it all. PATRICIA WATKINS-member of the law firm Bartlett, Pontiff, Stewart, Rhodes & Judge, we represent the Adirondack Girl Scout Council. The Adirondack Girl Scout Council, is very concern about this proposal and very much opposed to it. Initially I like to point out that the notice in the paper and the application describe this as a recreational facility. Its really a commercial recreation use under your Ordinance. Section 4.020-1 of your Ordinance, indicates that the Town wishes to isolate protect and encourage dispensation of the recreation industry. I would emphasize the term isolate it really does not belong in a residential community. I also notice that the application for the notice indicates there will be amusement rides, the application on the other hand states non-amusement rides. I don't know what that would be certainly that requires some kind of clarification. MR. TURNER-Do you want to answer that right now? MR. LA WRENCE-No rides of any kind. MS. WATKINS-As to the merits. As you all know its up to the applicant to show that their is some hardship and I will summit that has not been proven here. Its certainly conceded that the land is wet and low, but its a rather self servicing statement to say that the cost to this development at this land as its zone, I point out there is Town sewer servicing this property, I believe there is also Town water serving this property. This resolves many of the major problems with low wet land. Its been suggested by the applicant that it will be necessary to fill in 19 t 15 - --/~ acres of land in order to build. I would suggest that its not necessary their are other alternatives such as cluster development where it would not be necessary and the property could still be used for the amount of housing that it is zoned for. Its certainly not a swamp there because otherwise he would not be able to run the machines necessary to cut the grass and pick up the golf balls. Their is absolutely no evidence on the record that would possible prohibit this use that the burden has not been meet. The land is zoned SFR-IA this is your most prestigious residential property under your Ordinance. There are going to be many adverse impacts, the lights, traffic, and noise. It was zoned residential under prior Ordinance and continue as residential under this Ordinance. I have to believe that your planning commission and your Town Board, put a great deal of thought into changing 19 acres of land right in the center of prime residential area really flies in the face of long range planning and the master plan. Specific concerns to girls scouts. The traffic issue has been addressed we have to reemphasize that. We serve 3,200 girls in our council, we have a camp across the street, we run a day camp there in the summer, we rent our camp for a month to the Association for Retarded Children they run a camp program there, they use our camp facility throughout the year, our troops use the facility throughout the year. We are very concerned about the traffic. Although 55 spaces might not be a whole lot of cars this is going to be turn around traffic. People are not going to come in there and spend the day, their going to come in spend and hour and leave. We are talking about a potential of 55 cars every hour that's a lot more than 19 houses would draw. The batting cage, speed throwing, game room, those are certainly things designed to attract the teenagers that issued has been brought up we have a great deal of concern for that. Obviously we provide programs for teenagers we're not opposed to that, but we have very highly supervised programs and we are concerned that a commercial establishment would not provide that kind of supervision for. . .of traffic. My final question would be the potential for any sale of alcoholic beverages here that would just increase out concerns and opposition. DA VID KENNEY-resident of the Town of Queensbury. Also on the Advisory Committee for the Planning Board. I agree with what was first said... This would be clustering, the ideal use of this property would be...we felt that the low lands...without disturbing the nature...this ideal use of this property would be clustering...that is why we ...especially with the sewage and that so there is alternatives to the property. JOHN BURCH-resident of Cronin Road. I have a couple of problems that I've found with it. The video games, the batting cage, I guess have been addressed. Meadowbrook Road is a very narrow road that does not have curbs or sidewalks. This foot traffic that would be created from. . .Regency Park going back to the batting cages, and video cages, this would create a very unsafe condition for everybody users of the roads and the children. I also have a concept of the driving range as far as open space. I really didn't envision as being in a residential area, I think we all know golf balls don't generally go exactly as we like them to go. Its looks like the people that live on Cronin Road, maybe sending their children out to play with hockey helmets on. This isn't the kind of life we like to have over on Cronin Road. There is a great deal of wild life in this area. I personally have seen deer, owls, woodchucks, coons, many different types of birds, wild turkeys, and deers, and all the neighbors have told me of other species that they've seen that live in the area. Their is a thick growth now and as the proposal. . .ponds and clearing out the area, what happens when this large proposed pond to the east of the area where does that water going to go? I suggest that its probably going to go over onto my property and one of the other properties the water is going to have to go somewhere. Basically I think 80 to 85 per cent of the people that live in the area are represented here tonight, some of them may not speak, but I can assure you that their all here. I didn't hear anyone speak in favor of the variance, and I would like to go on record as opposing this. GERTRUDE KACENAS-lives on Cronin Road, next to Mr. Burch. I agree with him when that pond overflows like the flood we had this spring its going to be right on top of us, its right in our backyard. As far as the birds, we have at least 35 species of birds that come to our backyard that we have actually documented plus all the wildlife. I know the people are important, but so are they and 50 feet of buffer zone is only about half the width of our front yard and its not enough to protect either the wildlife or us. We are against it. JOHN ROZELL-Cronin Road. Most of the things that I was going to discuss have been discussed already so I won't waste more of your time. I just want to go on record that I'm definitely opposed to it. It is such a bad place that you described, I've been 30 years and love it as a resident. Their is something else that should be considered by the Town, or Board. This is a secondary road its only paved 1/4 of the way the length of this road, in otherwords the pavement stops from 1000 feet beyond the entrance. I am opposed to it. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED STAFF INPUT Notes from John Goralski, Planner (On file) 16 - -- CORRESPONDENCE Letter from Gertrude Kacenas, (on file) MOTION TO DENY USE VARIANCE NO. 55-1989, WILLIAM LA WRENCE,Introduced by Michael Muller who moved for its adoption, seconded by Susan Goetz: The applicant has proposed an idea which is totally incompatible with the area as well as with the requirements for the residential zone. The applicant has failed to prove hardship for the use variance, he has totally failed on all counts. There are other alternatives to develop this as residential" such as clustering that would be consistent with the residential use. This is incompatible for every item needed for a use variance. Duly adopted this 24th day of May, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Griffin, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Muller, Mr. Turner NOES: None ABSENT:N one AREA VARIANCE NO. 56-1989 SR-lA, LARRY NECESSARY ON THE EAST SIDE OF WEST MT. ROAD, JUST OPPOSITE NORTHERN SKI TRAILS OF WEST MT. SKI AREA. PROPOSAL TO DIVIDE THE PROPERTY INTO TWO FAIRLY EQUALLY SIZED LOTS, THE NEW LOT TO BE USED TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 125-6-6.1, 6.2 SECTION 4.020 MINIMUM LOT SIZE LOT SIZE: L3 ACRES LARR Y NECESSARY PRESENT MAP SHOWN TO BOARD MR. NECESSARY-Explained that the property now owned is the combination of two lots. MR. TURNER-Asked if this was a preexisting subdivision? MR. NECESSARY-Yes. MR. TURNER-This lot is shown as one in the blueprint. MR. NECESSARY-Originally the lot was shown as two different lots divided in a different set up. From the corner of Tina Lane, West Mountain, in that direction. MR. TURNER-Asked if it ran to the corner? MR. NECESSARY-Yes. The house was constructed on a lot containing approximately 25,000 square feet. The second lot contains about 30,000 square feet. MRS. GOETZ-Thought that this was squeezing in the house doesn't like it, asked why he would want to do this? MR. NECESSARY-Stated that the reason for doing this is that he cannot afford to properly clear and improve the lots as it now stands it would remain as it is. Feels that it would take away the effect of a vacant lot between his house and the next house to his. MRS. GOETZ-Asked what was wrong with the effect of the vacant out? MR. NECESSARY-Asked what was wrong with improving the lot with the house on it? MRS. GOETZ-Stated that he seems that he would be doing something bad to the neighbors by trying to squeeze another house in there. MR. NECESSARY-Doesn't have any figures with him to verify the house sizes, thinks the size of the house in relation to what is on the street could be built on this piece of property as proposed without. . .the neighborhood. MR. MULLER-Asked what would be the practical difficulty here? MR. NECESSARY-The practical difficulty is that the lots that I purchased were originally two lots and I'm proposing to recreate two lots, and in order to do that there is not room enough to comply with the one acre. MR. MULLER-Asked when he purchased it was the original configuration two lots? 17 MR. NECESSARY-The original configuration was two lots. MRS. EGGLESTON-Asked if it had two separate deeds? MR. NECESSARY-Yes. MR. MULLER-Asked if the property was in two lots as it was acquired by you, by virtue of the new Zoning Ordinance? MR. NECESSARY-The property is now combined on one deed, in my name. MRS. GOETZ-Asked if this was because he wanted his house on Tina Lane, instead of West Mountain Road? MR. MULLER-Asked that the way it was originally was it two triangular lots? MR. NECESSARY-Stated that the second lot was not a construction lot because there is water flowing from across West Mountain Road. MR. MULLER-Asked him to explained about the triangular lot? MR. NECESSARY-The triangular lot that is not built upon has run off water that runs along the side next to West Mountain Road, and towards the back of the property. MR. MULLER-Asked if there was a drainage easement in his deed? MR. NECESSARY-Not that I know of. MR. TURNER-Asked what caused him to put the house in the position that it is now? MR. NECESSARY-Stated that he bought the property as it now exists. MR. TURNER-Stated that he bought it split, now he wants to changes so that its in the other fashion. MRS. EGGLESTON-Asked how did it get to one deed? MR. NECESSARY-Had it changed to one deed so that the tax credits would be together. MR. TURNER-Asked that what he was saying is that right now its deeded in that fashion, and you want to change it to this fashion, correct? MR. NECESSARY-Yes. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED PETER SCHMIDT- I Tina Lane. I live at Lot #1, its actually 6 Tina Lane, but the mailing address is messed up. Basically what happened here was that I don't think Larry realizes that when Mike and Mary Brandt originally had the development in there is that they had to have. . . it was single one acre all the way down. . . These were broken down into originally 30,000 square foot and then. . .they went from five original lots to 6 additional lots so it moved things around a little bit. In here on the bottom (refers to map) right here in the original lines your looking at. . . That area right here contains 35,000 square feet which was designed for green area okay, its a wet weather area and the reason why he had to add that in there is because of the permeability on that it. . .would reduce it down to less than 50% needed for a SFR zone, and it would reduce it down to the other to get it down to 30% permeability and that's the reason why that green area was deeded over. Actually your talking about one lot what happens is that the person built here originally there were 5 lots in order to move things around to get the zoning past in this subdivision Mike and Mary, moved this green area around in order to get it through. Apparently the originally green area was deeded over to the people that bought this piece of property here. Also on the piece of property don't get the wrong idea I'm not an expert at this, but also the people that lived there the guy was a forester he showed me in the back the green area ladyslippers, lazysusans little flowers that go on the pine trees, they have also have been grown in there before, I still have a few out in back of my house that are on the endanger species list. Over in the back that water that comes across this pipe right here you can have anywhere between 3 foot to may be a 9 or 10 foot area it might be moved out. Larry hasn't been here long enough yet to where this back lawn is the pond. Basically the permeability of the area changes from Spring to July. If you had to move it down in order to. . .buy that house there you would have to move it back down to this green area, I don't believe this is why it was designed. . . 18 - - MR. TURNER-The back property slopes. MR. SCHMIDT-It goes right down real quick. I believe that the one area in this area over here (refers to map), also there would be more than 25 feet of relief. MRS. GOETZ-Are you for or against it? MR. SCHMIDT-I opposed it 100%. MARK WELLINGTON-I own the adjoining property next to Mr. Necessary to the east. Just to make it brief, I grew up 22 years of my life in the inner-city, and I walk out my front door and all I would see is concrete buildings. the reason I moved to this area and bought this place right here was because of the open spaces, its very nice, half of my lot is all wooded which goes down south to the green area. Part of that green area was deeded to my lot also a smaller part his is much larger. I have a child who is 2 years old and I just cannot see waking up every morning and open up my kids window and being nose to nose with another building. I didn't go over there and take any type of measurements, I didn't feel that was proper to walk on his property or anything like that. If you could imagine the width of this room and the length of this building that's all he has to build. I oppose it. JOHN LORD-has the adjoining property, I own 4 acres. This mountain runoff is very bad when you have a lot of snow. I mean, I have a culvert on my property which I don't know if its shown here, but where his culvert comes through Brandt had put brook in there this was all cut down everything was cut down and the people that developed, the original developers the person who owns that house they kept this down, and then they had some kind of problems. . .they moved out. I try to keep my property line down and clear, but you can't use that land from West Mountain Road back because it just floods up during the spring and sometimes it will run into June, when you have a big snowfall its a brook that's what it is. I have a culvert on my side and it also comes up through there, you can't see it but it is there the force of the water will throw sand up and that whole area becomes wet. This spring it showed up pretty good even though we didn't have any snow and its a very wet area, I don't see how you can actually get another house in that area. I don't know what your proposal is I haven't see it. Mr. Necessary, showed Mr. Lord, what was proposed. Opposed to it. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED CORRESPONDENCE Letter from Robert and JoAnn Jones, RD#2 West Mountain Road, opposed to Area Variance No. 56-1989, Larry Necessary. (on file) Letter from Charles and Frances Baldwin, West Mountain Road, opposed to Area Variance No. 56-1989. (on file) Letter from David and Kathleen Hubert, opposed to Area Variance No. 56-1989. (on file) Letter from Daniel and Carolyn Green, opposed to Area Variance No. 56-1989. (on file) STAFF INPUT Notes from John Goralski, Planner (On file) Warren County Planning Board, approved. MOTION TO DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. 56-1989, LARRY NECESSARY,Introduced by Joyce Eggleston who moved for its adoption, seconded by Susan Goetz: To deny on basis currently allowable use on property. The applicant is not deprived of reasonable use of land, no practical difficulty proven and this applicant is in direct conflict with the stated purpose of the SR-IA zone and the Town Master Plan, and there would be an adverse effect on the neighborhood. This would interfere with man made runoff areas that come from West Mountain. Duly adopted this 24th day of May, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Griffin, Mr. Kelley, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Muller, Mr. Turner NOES: None ABSENT:N one USE VARIANCE NO. 57-1989, LI-lA, GREATER GLENS F ALLS WARREN COUNTY BOARD OF REALTORS, INC. 269 BAY ROAD, OPPOSITE CR BARD TO CONVERT THE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE TO PROFESSTIONAL OFFICE SPACE. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 107-1-29 SECTION 10.040-B LOT SIZE: 95 FT. BY 136 FT. PATRICIA BOYLE PRESENT 19 - ____2ATRICIA BOYLE-Stated that they were jsut going to take an existing building that has --,""_.t used as a grocery and take out the deli and turn it into professional offices. MR. TURNER-Stated that for a use variance can be used as zoned, but not under these circumstances. MR. MULLER-Feels that this can productively be used in a light industrial zone. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED STAFF INPUT Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner, (On file) CORRESPONDENCE Warren County Planning Board, approved (on file) MOTION TO APPROVE USE VARIANCE NO. 57-1989, GREATER GLENS FALLS WARREN COUNTY BOARD OF REALTORS, INC.,Introduced by Michael Muller who moved for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard: The applicant has demonstrated that this is not going to have an adverse impact on the neighborhood. This is necessary to protect the substantial property right and this is unlikely to be productively used for any of the allowed zoning uses in the light industrial zone. The short EAF shows no negative impact. Duly adopted this 24th day of May, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Griffin, Mr. Sicard, Mr. Kelley, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Muller, Mr. Turner NOES: None ABSENT:N one AREA VARIANCE NO. 58-1989 RR-5A, NEAL P. HUBBELL EAST SIDE OF RIDGE ROAD JUST SOUTH OF PICKLE fiLL ROAD FOR AN ADDITION OF A DETACHED 2 CAR GARAGE WITH SECOND FLOOR STORAGE AREA. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 27-2-5.2 SECTION 7.074 SIDE SETBACK LINE LOT SIZE: 150 FT. BY 200 FT. NEAL HUBBELL PRESENT MR. HUBBELL-Neighbors present to state that they are in favor of it. MR. MULLER-Stated that he was seeking a 15 foot variance, would like to know more about the garage. Asked if he could move it closer to the house, or reduce it in size. MR. HUBBELL-The plans for the garage are 24 ft. by 32 ft. I have to keep the garage 10 feet north of the house moving along 15 feet to the property line. Back in 1984 when I built the log home, I was under the impression I needed 20 feet total side setback. This still wouldn't help me out, I don't see any other feasible way that I could do it. I have plenty of depth. MRS. GOETZ-Asked if it thought of making it attached to the house? MR. HUBBELL-Wanted to separate it from the house partially so that I could block that area off. .. Thought it would improve that concept of the house. The garage that I'm seeking would go out to the side of the house to match the log home. MRS. GOETZ-Asked if he came into the building inspectors office since he was under the impression that he needed something different? MR. HUBBELL-Back when I built the house I check into building the garage. At that time I was under the impression that I needed 20 feet of total side setback. MRS. GEOTZ-Asked him someone told him that? MR. HUBBELL-Yes. MRS. GEOTZ-Then you would of moved it over a little bit further? 29 MR. HUBBELL-Yes. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED RICHARD HUBBELL-As far as the land coming right up where. .. He is going to end up with the whole thing anyways. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED STAFF INPUT Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner (On file) CORRESPONDENCE Warren County Planning Board, approved. (On file) MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 58-1989, NEAL HUBBELL,Introduced by Jeffrey Kelley who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Turner: The applicant has requested a 15 foot side northerly setback instead of the required 30 feet. The applicant has shown practical difficulty that it is possible he could have been mislead by the Building Department, so he didn't place the house on the lot so that he could plan for the future garage. The 15 foot setback is not detrimental to the area; their has been no neighborhood opposition; the house is already in place and their is a unique situation regarding land, the land slopes away from the house so extensive fill work would be required to build a garage next to his house. The short EAF shows no negative impact. Duly adopted this 24th day of May, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Griffin, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Muller, Mr. Turner NOES: None ABSENT:N one AREA VARIANCE NO. 59-1989, UR-IO, THOMAS M. RUDELL 569 DIXON ROAD FOR THE EXPANSION OF EXISTING GARAGE TO A 2 CAR GARAGE AND ALSO EXPAND THE FAMILY ROOM IN THE SAME PROPORTION. TAX MAP NO. 92-1-1.8 SECTION 4.02D-E LOT SIZE: 14,394 SQ. FT. THOMAS RUDELL PRESENT MR. TURNER-Asked if the extension was going to be 4 feet? MR. RUDELL-The same size. MR. GRIFFIN-Stated that the houses on the road are close to the property line. MR. RUDELL-Stated that the neighbor next door has the same thing, he has a ranch, thinks they did this way because with a ranch you don't have to put anything behind it. MR. KELLEY-Stated that he really doesn't have a lot of choices. MR. RUDELL-Stated that the land drops off. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED STAFF INPUT Notes from John Goralski, Planner, (On file) MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 59-1989, THOMAS RUDELL, Introduced by 21 --->~~' Daniel Griffin who moved for its adoption, seconded by Joyce Eggleston: This is a request for a 2 foot relief on the northwest side of the building for a garage and family room. The practical difficulty is that it seems to be the only place the garage can go, the other side of the property has problems with the lay of the land and the Niagara Mohawk property. No adverse neighborhood impact the other houses are close to the property line. The EAF shows no negative impact. Duly adopted this 24th day of May, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Griffin, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Muller, Mr. Turner NOES: None ABSENT:N one AREA VARIANCE NO. 60-1989, m-3A GLENS FALLS CEMENT CO., INC. FOR A BUILDING ADDmON WmCH WILL BE USED FOR REFRACTORY BRICK AND EQUIPMENT STORAGE. SIZE OF BUILDING TO BE 20 FT. BY 30 FT. BY 56 FT. mGH. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 113-2-4 SECTION 4.020-0 LOT SIZE: 44.7 ACRES DON MAKI PLANNER ENGINEER PRESENT MRS. GOETZ-Read letter from Delaware and Hudson Railway Company, John A. Dension, dated January 25, 1989. (On file) MR. MAKI-Stated that this was just an addition to a existing building. We are building on the property line of D & H, actually building right on their property really don't have any other place to build. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED STAFF INPUT Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner, (On file) MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 60-1989, GLENS FALLS CEMENT COMPANY, INC.,Introduced by Michael Muller who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Turner: The applicant has demonstrated practical difficulty showing that public facilities will not be adversely affected. There are no feasible alternatives the adjoining property owner D & H railroad has indicated that they approve the plan both parties benefit from this. Duly adopted this 24th day of May, 1989, by the follwing vote: A YES: Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Griffin, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Muller, Mr. Turner NOES: None ABSENT:None On motion the meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Theodore Turner, Chariman 22