1994-06-15
ORI-,NAl
-'
QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
FIRST REGULAR MEETING
J'UNE 15TH. 1994
INDEX
Use Variance No. 28-1994
George M. Mabb
1.
Use Variance No. 29-1994
Ronald and Vivian DeLong
10.
Sign Variance No. 30-1994
Iliad Ltd.
d/b/a Bruegger's Bagel Bakery
15.
Area Variance No. 31-1994
James E. Valenti
30.
Use Variance No. 106-1993
John C. & Christine Bergeron
34.
Area Variance No. 29-1993
REQUEST FOR EXTENSION
Janet Huston Bell
38.
THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD
AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS
, MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES.
--/
',-
QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD
FIRST REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 15TH, 1994
7:30 P.M.
OF APPEALS
MEMBERS PRESENT
THEODORE TURNER, CHAIRMAN
LINDA HAUSER, SECRETARY
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-JAMES MARTIN
PLANNER-SUSAN CIPPERLY
STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI
NEW BUSINESS:
USE VARIANCE NO. 28--1994 TYPE: UNLISTED SR-IA GEORGE M. MABB
OWNER: HARRY VANGUILDER SOUTH OF INTERSECTION OF HOWARD ST. AND
SHERMAN AVENUE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO PLACE A MOBILE HOME OUTSIDE
A MOBILE HOME OVERLAY ZONE. RELIEF IS SOUGHT FROM SECTION 179-29,
WHICH DESIGNATES AREAS WHERE MOBILE HOMES ARE ALLOWED, AND FROM
SECTION 179-19D, ALLOWED USES IN A SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONE. TAX
MAP NO. 120-2--18 LOT SIZE: 100 FT. BY 138 FT. SECTION 179 29,
179-190
GEORGE MABB, PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Staff, Use Variance No. 28-1994, George M. Mabb, Meeting
Date: June 15, 1994 "APPLICANT: George Mabb PROJECT LOCATION:
south of intersection of Howard Street and Sherman Avenue SUMMARY
OF PROJECT: Applicant proposes to place a mobile home outside of
a Mobile Home Overlay zone. CONFORMANCE WITH USE/AREA REGULATIONS:
Relief is sought from Section 179-29, which designates areas where
Mobile Homes are allowed, and from Section 179-19D, allowed uses in
Suburban Residential 1 Acre zone. REVIEW CRITERIA, BASED ON
SECTION 267--b OF TOWN LAW: 1 . I S A REASONABLE RETURN POSS IBLE IF
THE LAND IS USED AS ZONED?: Due to the location and condition of
the property, it is not likely that this parcel will have future
use as a site for a conventional home. 2. IS THE ALLEGED HARDSHIP
RELATING TO THIS PROPERTY UNIQUE, OR DOES IT ALSO APPLY TO A
SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF THE DISTRICT OR NEIGHBORHOOD? This property
appears to be unique in the area. 3. IS THERE AN ADVERSE EFFECT
ON THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD? The applicant and
the former owner of the property have both stated that the property
is being cleaned up and improved by the applicant. 4. IS THIS THE
MINIMUM VARIANCE NECESSARY TO ADDRESS THE UNNECESSARY HARDSHI P
PROVEN BY THE APPLICANT AND AT HIE SAME TIME PROTECT THE CHARACTER
OF THE NE I GHBORHOOD AND THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE
COMMUNITY? Yes, it appears to be. PARCEL HISTORY: According to
the Town Assessor's records: A ramshackle house was situated on
this property until it was demolished in September, 1992. Sometime
after that a mobile home was placed on the property. It burned,
and was removed. The Assessor's records indicate that it was there
at least until February 9, 1993. STAFF COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: No
further comment. SEQR: This is an Unlisted Action. The Short
Form EAF should be reviewed."
MR. TURNER-Mr. Mabb,
that your property?
the driveway that goes into the
Is that part of the property?
trailer,
is
MR. MABB-No.
MR. TURNER-Then you don't front on the highway?
lot doesn't front on Sherman Avenue then, does
Is that lot, that
it?
MR. MABB-No.
-- 1
MS. C1PPERLY-He may also own the one in front of this one.
MR. TURNER-Who owns the house in the front?
MR. MABB--Tha t house in the front?
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. MABB-My wife and I.
MR. TURNER-You're going to merge the two lots, then, right? Are
you going to merge the two lots?
MR. MABB-Are we going to merge the two lots, put them together?
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. MABB-No.
MR. TURNER-No.
MR. MABB-Not at this time.
MS. C1PPERLY-I guess if he got the Use Variance, he'd have to come
back and get an Area Variance to be on a Town road, then.
MR. TURNER-You don't own that driveway, right?
MR. MABB-No, I don't. That's been a driveway through there since,
probably, 60 years or better. The Power Company went down through
there and put a power pole in, from what I understand.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. MABB-Mrs. Green lived there.
MR. TURNER-Well, I think there's a gentleman in the audience maybe
can answer the questions, okay. So, anyone else have any
questions, as to that aspect of it? Any other concerns about the
mobile home being there, placement of a mobile home being there?
Do you want to address that issue now, with him?
MR. CARVIN-The mobile home that's there now, where's the lot? Is
that one going to go?
MR. TURNER-It's going to go.
MR. CARVIN-There's a mobile home on the lot now?
MR. MABB-Yes.
MR. CARVIN-Okay, and is that one going to go, or is there going to
be another one there?
MR. MABB-No, that one's staying.
MS. CIPPERLY-That's the one that he's trying to get permission to
have there.
MR. MABB-I had one there before. They gave me a permit for it, a
year. Then I came for another one, and they said I might better
go, instead of going year, after year. The one that was there
burned. There was an old man living there, and he dropped a
cigarette in the couch, and she went. I took it all out and
cleaned it all up.
MS. CIPPERLY-Was it Mr. Hatin that told you to come in and get a,
straighten this all out?
MR. MABB-Yes.
- 2 -
'--
MS. CIPPERLY-Yes. Dave ~-latin has been trying to, the Building
Inspector, he's been trying to get this legal.
MR. MABB-There was one there way back, years ago, (lost word) lived
there.
MR. TURNER-Okay, but how long was that gone, George? How long has
it been since that was there?
MR. MABB-The whole complete trailer
building that was there, part of it was
(lost word) they built buildings around
there. It was caving in, and I took it
there.
was never gone. The old
part of that old building.
trailers. That's what was
all down and put a trailer
MS. CIPPERLY-This is why I went to the Assessor's Office, to try to
figure out what had been there in the past, and from the picture,
it's impossible to tell, because it was complete surrounded with
wooden additions, which Mr. Mabb had said they, whoever built this,
was in the habit of just adding on when they could get scrap lumber
from the dump or something. So it really wasn't possible to tell.
The Assessor's records indicated they didn't even consider it
necessarily habitable. So that's what was there.
MR. CARVIN-That's the one that burned down?
MS. CIPPERLY-That was demolished and then another trailer was put
on.
MR. MABB-No, tha t 's the one took down becaus e it
down. The one that bur ned down was the one tha t
Queensbury gave me a permit to put in there.
was falling
the Town of
MR. TURNER-Did you get it from tIle Town Board? You had to get it
from the Town Board then?
MR. MABB-Yes.
I went to the Town Board and got a year permit.
MR. CARVIN-How long after the one that burned down was it replaced?
MR. MABB-I moved that one over on this side of the lot and moved
the other one right in.
MR. CARVIN-So there was no appreciable time lapse?
MR. MABB--No.
MR. CARVIN-Who owns the piece of property, there's a, looks like a
ramshackle shack that's In the front there, right on Sherman.
MR. MABB-Right on Sherman?
MR. CARVIN-Yes.
MR. MABB-It belongs to Charlie VanGuilder.
MR. TURNER-That's the one L1n talking about, George. That's the
one you said YQQ owned, but that belongs to Mr. VanGuilder.
MR. MABB-No, that's not mine.
MR. TURNER-Okay. That's the one 1 was talking about.
MR. MABB- I'm right next door to that.
MR. TURNER--Yes.
MR. MABB-Two story building.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
3
MR. CARVIN-Also, if memory serves correct, is there another house
out in back, too, or is there just the trailer out there?
MR. MABB-Ther e us ed to be. I tor e it all down.
a permit to put a trailer there.
The Town gave me
MR. CARVIN-Okay.
MR. TURNER-Anyone else?
MR. MABB-All I'm doing is replacing what's there.
MR. TURNER-Okay. Let me open the public hearing, and we'll see
where it goes from there, George. I'll now open the public hearing
on this application.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
HAROLD W. KATZ
MR. KATZ-My name is Harold W. Katz. My post office address is P.O.
Box 3203 Glens Falls, NY. I own 25 acres of land on the south side
of Sherman Avenue, some fronting on Howard Street, some fronting on
Leo Street, and then running west, and the back towards Luzerne
Road. The property that Mr. Mabb was discussing, I don't have
dates or the deeds. It was sold in three separate parcels. The
two front parcels were 60 feet wide and 150 feet deep.
Subsequently, a man named Lopez, who bought them originally,
purchased another strip of land, which was roughly 100 feet deeper,
in the back of these two parcels. To the west of this parcel that
supposedly Mr. Charlie VanGuilder owns, it shows on the tax map in
large, or dark lines, as what might be the street. This is from
the original survey made by Claude Adams. At the time that Mr.
Ripley owned this property and had it surveyed, he intended to put
streets through, and have them developed. I bought this property
in 1971. Since that time, nothing has changed, as far as the lot
lines are concerned, or anything else. Mr. Mabb, and I'd say as a
result of my being gracious to him, has continued to use this 50
foot strip that shows on here as being a street, anyway he wanted
to. I have not interfered with that, although each time he used
it, of course, he was violating mY rights, and in fact was
encroaching, until such time as it became apparent that what was
ever going on between Charlie VanGuilder and Harry VanGuilder and
Mr. Mabb was a detriment to the entire neighborhood. Up until this
time, I haven't done a thing about this. Mr. Mabb has been a
trespasser. It didn't seem to bother him a bit. I haven't
interfered, but I note that most of these inhabitants and residents
on the south side of Sherman Avenue, who's properties run along and
divide some of mY frontage, have done a great deal to improve their
homes. They're single family residences. There are no trailers
there. They've spent money. They've tr ied to maintain them,
landscape them, and do a great deal for them. The only eye sore in
that entire stretch is this particular parcel we're talking about.
I understand Mr. Mabb has already moved in parts of the frame of
the new trailer, without even having a variance to begin with. I
would remind you that one of the purposes specified by the Zoning
Ordinance, in SR-IA zoning, is to enhance and protect the character
of Queensbury's suburban neighborhoods, and to provide for future
residential development opportunities. I can tell you that since
I've owned this property, there has been no one who has wanted to
b u i 1 d res ide n c est her e , p rima r i I y be c a use 0 f t his eye so r e t hat
exists, that's owned by Mr. VanGuilder, and apparently is being
purchased by Mr. Mabb. I'm not going to permit Mr. Mabb to be a
trespasser any longer. Therefore, if he's unable to use this 50
foot strip, he will have absolutely no access to the property on
which to locate his trailer. I think it's doing a total disservice
to the other residents in that general area, to permit a variance
here for a trailer, or continued usage of that property in the
manner which it's been used heretofore, unalterably opposed, and
I'll go on record right now as advising Mr. Mabb that I'm going to
- 4 -
-/
"-
block off that road, and I'm not going to permi t any further
trespassing by anyone. Now there are about three other similar
strips along that south side of Sherman Avenue that are my
property. If necessary, I'll block them all off. I hate to do it,
but I've owned this since 1971, and I've tried to be real nice
about it. People have come in, cut down trees. They've done a lot
of things in there. I don't know who they are, because I'm not
there to watch it. Many of that, I'll note for the record, is a
trespass. This is landlocked. Therefore, I don't know how Mr.
Mabb intends to have access to this parcel, unless they tear down
that house that fronts on Sherman Avenue, pardon me, that shanty.
I'll answer any questions you may have.
MR. TURNER-Okay. Has anybody got any questions?
MR. CARVIN-Well, the obvious question is, Mr. Mabb has indicated a
right-oi-way. To the best of your knowledge, is there any right-
of-way?
MR. KATZ-There is no right-of-way.
MR. MABB-That was Howard Street extension, years ago, and that's
been a right-of-way for better than 50 years there. Nobody's ever
s top p e d my way 0 f go i n g t h r 0 ugh the r e . I ' ve n eve r had any
problems. Mrs. Green raised seven kids down there. The Power
Company has a right-of-way to go back there and put a power pole up
for that house that was back there, that you call a shanty. Now
why isn't it still a right-of-way for anybody else? There is a
fire lane down through there. If there wasn't a fire lane, we
would have been burned out a long time ago, including last year,
when West Glens Falls had to go out there and put a fire out at the
pole lines, and on your property. Now if you close those roads
off, the right-of-way out through there, you're going to burn half
that neighborhood out, when it starts again.
MR. KATZ-Well, Mr. Mabb, I'm not about to engage in a discussion
with you here. The record is clear. The deed, which is on record,
under Mr. Ripley, Mr. Ripley's estate.
MR. MABB-(lost word) see the deed and the right-of-way that closes
that off as a right-ai-way.
MR. KATZ-There is no right-of-way.
MR. MABß-Yes, there was. You go back on the old Town maps and
you'll see it was Howard Street extension years ago. Look at the
map.
MR. KATZ-That's not my job.
MR. MABß-Well, it's not my, you're questioning mY rights.
MR. KATZ-No, I'm not.
MR. MAßß-You said yourself there was a dark, In there for a right-
of-way through there.
MR. TURNER-Okay.
Thank you.
Any other questions for Mr. Katz?
All right.
MR. KATZ-Thank you very much.
MR. TURNER-Anyone else wish to be heard in opposition to this
application?
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. TURNER-Okay. Any discussion? If Mr. Katz is gOlng to close it
off, there's no right-of-way. It's not maintained by the Town or
anything. The Town doesn't maintain the road at all, does it,
5 -
"~"
George?
MR. MABB-The Town hasn't maintained that road in probably 30 years,
that I know of. I've lived up there.
MR. TURNER-I know you have. Yes.
MR. KATZ-I didn't hear that.
MR. TURNER-I said the Town does not maintain that so called right-
of-way or extension of Howard Street.
MR. MABB-No. They haven't done its ince they cut the road way
through when the put the power pole up.
MR. KATZ-It's never been dedicated to the Town, nor accepted.
MR. TURNER-Okay. That's all want to know. We can't grant a
variance on a, no frontage on a public highway.
MR. CARVIN-I was going to say, I mean, there seems to be an awful
lot of road blocks to this, before we can even move ahead.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. MENTER-Mr. Mabb, YOU re not the owner? Mr. VanGuilder still
owns the property?
MR. MABB-He still owns it.
I've only got it half paid for.
MR. MENTER-Okay, and you re looking to purchase that?
MR. TURNER-You're in the process of buying the property.
correct?
Is that
MR . MAB B - Yes . I ' ve got i t h a 1 f p aid for. I c 1 e a n e d i t up. I
spent thousands of dollars. Yes, I did move part of the trailer
frame in, that he was told that I put in yesterday. There's a
house trailer frame that I took out of the woods, that was given to
me, and I cut it up, and it's gone, right now. It's gone. I cut
it up and gave it to my nephew to make a dumpster for his garbage.
MR. MENTER-Do you have specific information as to the status of
that 50 foot strip, that right-of-way, piece of right-of-way?
MR. MABB-No. I don't have anything. All I know is that we've been
using it for better than 50 years.
MR. TURNER-George, what you might better do is get a copy of the
deed or something from Mr. VanGuilder, and then you can clarify
what, who owns what. Mr. Katz knows what he owns. Lets see what
Mr. VanGuilder owns.
MR. MABB-I know what he own.
MR. TURNER-I know, but you don't have a record to show it.
MR. MABB-Who owns the road, Katz or the Power Company?
MR. TURNER-Mr. Katz.
MR. KATZ-First of all, it's not a road.
MR. TURNER-It's not a road.
MR. KATZ-Second of all, the Power Company asked for permission to
go in and put in the pole, and they also bought an easement
the power I ine east and west through this property that
There wasn't any question about their being able to put
pole. They asked for permission and they received it.
to run
I own.
up the
- 6 -
'-
-.../
MR. MABB--You gave them permission to put the power pole up years
ago? The area that they use for a road is owned by you.
MR. KATZ Exactly.
MR. MABB-How did you get the road?
MR. KATZ-It isn't a road.
It's just part of the land I own.
MR. MABB-That's been a road better than 60 years.
MR. TURNER-George, it has to be dedicated to the Town, to becomc a
road.
MR. MABB-All right. What if I connect that with my other property?
What if I connect the whole thing to my property?
MR. TURNER-That's up to you.
MR. MABB--I'll connect the whole thing, if that's what you want.
I'll have a new deed made out.
MR. KATZ-Excuse me. What do you mean by connect the whole thing,
George?
MR. MABB-I'll connect it with my property.
MR. KATZ-Connect what?
MR. MABB-My property in the back, that I'm buying from Mr.
VanGuilder.
MR. KATZ-I have no problem with that.
MR. MABB-And if you're going to close the road off, close it off,
and you stop them from going all the way out back and dumping, and
I hope my house doesn't burn because you closed the fire lane off.
I'll connect the whole property, if it's all right with Mr.
VanGui lder, I'll connect it all.
MR. TURNER-This is going to go no place.
MR. KARPELES-Well, we're getting bogged down on the right-of-way,
but I think there's some other considerations.
MR. TURNER-There's no bogging down in the right-of-way, because
it's not a dedicated road, and Mr. Katz has a map right there, and
just because George used it, doesn't give him ownership of it. It
doesn't give anybody ownership of it.
MR. MABB-I didn't say that.
MR. KARPELES But I think therc's some other concerns also.
MR. MABB-There's been a mobile home back there, way back in the
60's.
MR. TURNER-I know, George, but nobody's pushed the issue now.
MR. MABB-Not now, because it's a home, and I tore the old building
down because it burnt, and somebody got hurt.
MR . KARP E L E S - I don' tun de r s tan d why are a son a b 1 ere t urn i s n ' t
possible if the land is used as zoned, and I think it would have a
definite adverse effect on the neighborhood character.
MR. MABB-Neighborhood? I'm out in the woods, next
There's nothing there but woods, and my property.
don't go out and spend a thousand dollars planting
mean it's not (lost word) property.
to a pole line.
Just because I
flowers doesn't
-- 7
MS. CIPPERLY-Mr. Katz, did you intend to possibly develop that 25
acres at some time in the future?
MR. KATZ-Yes, as a matter of fact.
MS. CIPPERLY-As a residential?
MR. KATZ-Residential, well, half of it was (lost word), the front
half, that is that area that fronts on Sherman Avenue, is zoned SR-
lA, but the back hal f, toward Luzerne Road, is zoned Light
Industrial. Why that was done, I don't know. At the time, the
powers that be thought that's the way they wanted it.
MR. TURNER-Okay. Lets move the application.
MR. CARVIN-Well,
choices, here.
think, again, we come down to a couple of
MR. TURNER-Either deny it or table it.
MR. CARVIN-Yes.
MR. TURNER-This gentleman wants to, I'll just open the public
hearing one more time.
PUBLIC HEARING RE-OPENED
MIKE RAFFERTY
MR. RAFFERTY-My name is Mike Rafferty. I reside at 474 Sherman
Avenue, two or three lots west of this property. Several years
ago, I' v e bee nth ere a p pro x i ma tel y 1 7 yea r s . I ' vet r i e d to buy
both pieces of property next door to me. I was advised that they
would not connect mine because the piece of property in the center
is Mr. Katz's. I've been offered both pieces of property by the
owners over the years that I've been there. Mr. Harry VanGuilder
informed me that his was available first, but it was landlocked.
This is 10 years ago (lost word) through the VanGuilder family.
Now he owns it. I th ink it was owned by his mother when she was
alive. He said it was landlocked. The own thing that connected
was his brother's property, Charlie's in the front, and what is now
Mr. Mabb's, to the right. A few years back, one day there was an
enormous trailer going in the back yard down this property of Mr.
Katz's, George was bringing in a trailer, and I rushed out and
asked him what he was doing. He said, this is my new shed. Well,
the shed got put in. Many of the neighbors complained, Dave Hatin
started his siege that's been going on for a couple of years. At
one time, there was at least two trailers, the time one burned,
there were two there. There was no permission, for a long period
of time, for somebody living in a house trailer attached to the
building, or excuse me, a travel trailer. We went to court, and
Mr. Hatin asked me if I would attest to what I saw happening on the
property. I did. It came to court, and we were the laughing
stock. Since then, recently, there has been a lot of cleaning up
going on. There's a new person living in the thing, and it was mY
understanding that he had permission to have a trailer there for a
year, which ended about the first of the year, and it's my
understanding Mr. Hatin's been getting, tried to get you to correct
this, move the trailer, or make it legal ever since. I tried, on
many occasions, putting signs up on that piece of property, saying
that it was private property, not an open road. The signs
disappeared. I parked my vehicle over there, and I was told by
people visiting Mr. Mabb they'd run over my vehicle, kill me if I
gave them any hard time. There was nothing but problems over it,
repeated times. I've had long talks with Mr. Mabb, including one
this afternoon, because that is not open property. He refuses to
accept it. I've told him I've checked with the Town several times
over the last several years. He refuses to accept the Town's word.
Mr. Hatin's told him a dozen times he can't use that land. He
refuses to accept it. I have a tax map here that shows that it's,
- 8 -
-.-/
'-
I picked it up today. It shows that the property is landlocked,
but it is landlocked on one side by his current property. If he
were going to put an access road through his property, then it
might be acceptable, if you choose to let him put a trailer there.
MR. TURNER-Any questions before he leaves, anybody?
MS. C I P PER L Y - D 0 you h a vet h eta x ma p ? I'm won d e r i n gab 0 u t the
total acreage that Mr. Mabb owns. Just let me take a look.
MR. CARVIN-I think, in the future, Ted, I think one of the things,
if we're going to table this, that we ought to have a map of who
all the players are and what the properties look like.
MR. KARPELES-Why are we tabling it?
MR. TURNER-Well, the issue came right up this evening as to the
piece of property being landlocked. Nobody knew anything about it.
MR. KARPELES-There's an awful lot of good reasons for rejecting it,
without tabling it.
MR. TURNER-Let him table it if he wants to table it, but he'll have
to bring back the evidence.
MS. CIPPERLY-It would also require a variance.
MR. TURNER-For frontage on a Town road.
MS. CIPPERLY--To have two principal dwellings on less than two
acres.
MR. TURNER-Dwellings on one lot.
MS. CIPPERLY-He doesn't have
happens, he's go i ng to need
research this some more, but
two a ere s . So, noma t t e r w hat
ei ther another variance, or we can
I'm not sure that it would.
MR. TURNER-Do you understand that, George?
MR. MABB-There's been a trailer there since 1960. It's been there.
Maybe not this one, but there's been one there, since way back in
the 60's. All I did is took a building down that was part of one
and replaced it. The Town gave me a permit for that one. Yes, I
did have a misunderstanding with Dave Hatin, because I'm a hot
headed German. I cleaned that land by my hands. I should be hot
headed, because all I did was replace the building. That was there
since 1960, and I'm here tonight because he asked me to do it this
way. He never said I couldn't use that for a right-oi-way or
anything.
MR. TURNER-George, but he doesn't have control of the right-of-way.
MR. MABB-Right, I understand that, but he just stated that, he told
me I couldn't use his right-of-way. He never told me that, or I
can't build a road on the other side, on my own land.
MR. TURNER-Mr. Katz owns that piece of property you call a right-
of-way.
MR. MABB-He says he does.
haven't seen any papers.
MR. TURNER-Well, he's got it right there.
MR. MABB-Let him show it to me.
MR. TURNER-So what's your pleasure? Do you want to table the
application so you can furnish this Board with some evidence?
MR. MABB--On wha t?
- 9-
MR. TURNER-On the property, what you want to do with it. You don't
have access from that lot to the highway. That's one variance. If
you combi ne your proper ty with the other proper ty, you need a
variance for two structures that are under the acreage.
MR. MABB-Under the grandfathered law, that road's been open for
better than 50 years.
MR. TURNER-George, it's not dedicated. If it's not dedicated, you
don't own it, and you don't have rights to it. What's your
pleasure? Do you want to table the application for now?
MR. MABB-Table it, please.
MR. TURNER-All right.
MOTION TO TABLE USE VARIANCE NO. 28-1994 GEORGE M. MABB,
Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Fred Carvin:
At the applicant's request, to furnish the Board with further
information as pertains to this application.
Duly adopted this 15th day of June, 1994, by the following vote:
MR. CARVIN-I'd like to also suggest that Mr. Mabb consult a lawyer
to find out what the legal ramifications are, have the deeds
researched, and make sure that there is or isn't any right-of-ways
there, and what you can and can't do if you combine it, because I
don't think you understand all the ramifications there.
MR. MABB-Why can this guy take a trailer out today. Tomorrow move
another one in? I moved one out that's been there better than 30
years and put one there?
MR. CARV IN-Okay. Mr. Mabb, don't th i nk anybody' s ar gu i ng the
trailer, but how are you going to ~ to the trailer?
MR. MABB-I' 11 cut a road through illY property.
MR. CARVIN-Okay. That's what I'm saying. You just can't cut a
road through your property because you're opening up another can of
worms.
MR. MABB-It's illY property. If I want to put a road on it, why
can't I? I'm the one that paid for it.
MR. CARVIN-Because,
let him explain it.
still think you better consult a lawyer, and
MR. MABB-I will.
MR. TURNER-George, when you table the application, you have 60
days, all right. At the end of 60 days, it's a new application.
Okay.
AYES: Mr. Maresco, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin,
Miss Hauser, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Thomas
USE VARIANCE NO. 29-1994 TYPE: UNLISTED SR-20 RONALD & VIVIAN
DELONG OWNER: SAM CHATTERTON 418 DIVISION ROAD APPLICANT
PROPOSES TO PLACE A MOBILE HOME OUTSIDE OF A MOBILE HOME OVERLAY
ZONE. RELIEF IS SOUGHT FROM SECTION 179-29, WHICH DESIGNATES AREAS
WHERE MOBILE HOMES ARE ALLOWED, AND FROM SECTION 179-19D, ALLOWED
USES IN A SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL 20 ZONE. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING)
6/8/94 TAX MAP NO. 147-1-51 LOT SIZE: 200 FT. BY 200 FT.
- 10 --
----'
"--
SECTION 179 190, 179-29
RONALD & VIVIAN DELONG, PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Staff, Use Variance No. 29-1994, Ronald & Vivian DeLong,
Meeting Date: June 15, 1994 "APPLICANT: Ronald and Vivian DeLong
PROJECT LOCATION: 418 Division Road SUMMARY OF PROJECT:
Applicant proposes to place a mobile home outside of a Mobile Home
Over lay zone. CONFORMANCE W ITH USE/AREA REGULATIONS: Re 1 i ef is
sought from Section 179-29, which designates areas where Mobile
Homes are allowed, and from Section 179-19D, allowed uses in a
Suburban Residential 20 zone. REVIEW CRITERIA, BASED ON SECTION
267-b OF TOWN LAW: 1. IS A REASONABLE RETURN POSSIBLE IF THE LAND
IS USED AS ZONED?: Parcel No. 147-1--51 is large enough to be
subdivided into two conforming lots. The only way to accomplish
this is to create a front and a back lot. This configuration is
not necessarily desirable unless there is a family relationship
between the occupants of both parcels. The appl icant is the
owner's son, who needs to live near his parents at this time in
their lives, and a mobile home is what he can afford. There has
not been an attempt to market the property, as reasonable return is
not the purpose behind this request. 2. IS THE ALLEGED HARDSHIP
RELAT I NG TO TH I S PROPERTY UN I QUE, OR DOES I T ALSO APPLY TO A
SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF THE DISTRICT OR NEIGHBORHOOD? As described
above, the situation is somewhat unique. 3. IS THERE AN ADVERSE
EFFECT ON THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD? This would
not be the only mobile home in the neighborhood, but the majority
of the homes are conventional construction. Since this would be a
rear lot, and there is an existing house and vegetation, it would
not be extremely visible from Division Road. It would be visible
from Ogden Road, to the wes t. Staff recei ved one phone call, to
date, in which the caller expressed strong feelings about mobile
homes in general in the neighborhood, not wanting any more to be
installed. The caller was reluctant to give a name, but was
advised to submit a written conrrnent to the Board, if possible. 4.
IS THIS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE NECESSARY TO ADDRESS THE UNNECESSARY
HARDSHIP PROVEN BY THE APPLICANT AND AT THE SAME TIME PROTECT THE
CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF
THE COMMUNITY? Yes, it is. PARCEL HISTORY: The first sale of
this parcel looks to be August 30, 1974 by Allan and Loren
Chatterton. STAFF COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: Since the lot can be
legally subdivided, the Issue is purely whether to allow the
installation of a mobile home rather than conventional housing.
ATTACHMENTS: SEQR: This is an Unlisted Action. The Short Form
EAF needs to be reviewed."
MISS HAUSER-Warren County Planning Board, on June 8th, 1994,
recorrul1ended that there was "No County Impact" with this variance.
MR. TURNER-Mr. DeLong, do you care to add anything further to your
comments on your application?
MR. DELONG-No, that's probably about all.
MR. TURNER-Your only reason to put the trailer there is to take
care of your wife's parents. Is that correct?
MR. DELONG-Basically, that's it.
MR. TURNER-Well, you have to prove to us that you can't realize a
reasonable return if the land is used as zoned. You already have
one principal dwelling on the one lot, and you propose to subdivide
the lot i nth ere a r, and ma k e a n add i t ion a I lot, but you h a v en' t
tried to market the lot or put a conventional home on it.
MR. DELONG-I understand that, and the lot probably would never ever
be sold. My parents are not going to sell the lot, no matter what.
The lot is going to be turned over to us, and he's not ever going
- 1 1 -
to sell the lot. He's actually going to sign the lot over to us,
because and then we own the lot ourselves. As it is right now,
he's already signed it over to us. So, therefore, it will never be
on the market.
MR. CARVIN-How old are the parents?
MRS. DELONG-My father's 80, he will be next month. My mother's 78,
and my mother just had a stroke, about a year and a half ago, which
has affected her memory, affected her sight. She had cataract
surgery on both eyes, and which didn't help much, and my father's
had a heart attack. He still works outside every day. He works
really hard and strong, but he can't do everything himself. My mom
(lost word) the laundry. She can't cook. She can't do anything.
So, as it is right now, we're living with them, but we're paying
lot rent on a mobile home that's just sitting there. We've been
living with my parents for probably a month now.
MR. CARVIN-And where would that be?
MRS. DELONG-That's right on Division Road, Box 418. That's where
my parents live.
MR. CARVIN-Okay, in the existing single family home?
MRS. DELONG-Right. That's where we re living right now, but our
mobile home is in Homestead Village.
MR. TURNER-They're going to put theirs in.
MR. CARVIN-Okay. The mobile home is your mobile home?
MRS. DELONG-Right, that's our mobile home.
parents' house.
The house is my
MR. CARVIN-Okay, and what year is the mobile home?
MRS. DELONG-It's an '88.
MR. CARVIN-'88. What is it, 14 by?
MR. TURNER-Fourteen by seventy-two.
MR. CARVIN-I guess one of the questions Ijm going to ask, and I
don't want it taken in the wrong way, but, because of the age of
your parents, and because the subdivision of the lot, what happens
if they should require nursing home care, or if they should move
out of that mobile home, if the mobile home is allowed in there?
MRS. DELONG-They're not going to live in the mobile home. We will.
My parents will live right in their house that they're in now.
MR. CARVIN-Okay. Same question, same scenario. Lets say your
parents vacate the premises. Would you move into the house, or is
this going to be your permanent residence there?
MR. DELONG-No. They have a son that lives with them now, which is,
he's about 60 years old, too. When they pass away, he will live
there by himself. He will inherit the house.
MR. CARVIN-Okay. So at
likelihood of those lots
this point there's probably very
ever being sold?
little
MR. DELONG-Right.
MRS. DELONG-It'll never be sold. Even with, he's got it in his
will that when something happens to them and something happens to
my other brother, it's to be put down to kids and then to
grandchildren, and he never wants the lot sold, never.
- 12 -
--,,'
'-'
MR. DELONG-He put it in his will.
MRS. DELONG--He put it in his will that it has to stay in the
family.
MR. CARVIN-I still have the problem of putting a mobile home in
there and you folks finding a place over in Bedford Close and
moving out, and renting the mobile home, in other words, becoming
a rental property. I guess that's one of mY biggest fears, in that
particular area.
MR. DELONG-I understand what you're saying, but that's not a
problem. We plan on living in the mobile home the rest of our
lives. I understand what you're saying, that we can't just rent
the trailer, but that's not our purpose. We don't plan on doing
that. We want to put the mobile home there permanently and live
there the rest of our lives. We have no intentions on selling the
land or the mobile home, or the house, the lot that the house is
on.
MR. CARVIN-Have you tried renting the mobile home at this point?
MRS. DELONG-Not right now, no, because we're trying to, we haven't
even tried to.
MR. CARVIN-Do you have
conventional house there?
any intentions of ever building
Would that be in the cards?
a
MR. DELONG-No. I own the mobile home now. Why should I build? I
own my own home now. Why should I go out and make new payments,
when I don't have one now?
MR. CARVIN-Okay.
I think that's all I have, for this point.
MR. TURNER-Anyone else? Okay.
public hearing.
don't have any.
I'll open the
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
PLINEY TUCKER
MR. TUCKER-I'm Pliney Tucker, Division Road, Queensbury. In the
notes by the Zoning Board of Appeals, claims other mobile homes in
the area. There's one other mobile home on the road, or on the
street, and going back to when Hector was a pup, when the trailer
was put in there, that was the only trailer that was to go on that
site, and when that trailer was removed from the site, there would
no longer be a mobile home there. I assume all you people visited
this site out there on Division Road. I believe you will see that
there isn't much vegetation to hide that mobile home from Division
Road, no matter where it's sits on that lot. I'd rather be any
place but here tonight, because I've know Sam Chatterton all my
life. l've worked all my life, and this kind of stuff bothers me,
but we just went through a total reval, in the Town of Queensbury,
and I know my particular home, the assessed valuation was doubled,
and being a contractor in the building business, banks, or lending
institutions, lets not pick on banks, but lending institutions
frown on mobile homes in areas where you're trying to borrow money
to build homes, and I have information from a pretty good source,
and I'm not going to mention names, but I understand if this
application is approved, that you're going to have another one in
front of you right away to locate another mobile home on that
street, and if you've been out there in the neighborhood, you know
there's some pretty nice homes there, and people have worked hard
all their lives to put these things together, and I just personally
feel that if this is allowed to happen, that it's going to devalue
the properties on that street and in the area. Thank you.
MR. TURNER-Okay. Anyone else wish to be heard in opposition to the
application?
-- 1 3--
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. TURNER-Okay. Public hearing's closed. Any Correspondence?
CORRESPONDENCE
MR. TURNER-We have one letter that came in, but it's not signed.
MS. CIPPERLY-That's probably the person that called.
MR. TURNER-Well , it's
lives on the street.
a concerned citizen of Division Road, who
I think you should read it into the record.
MISS HAUSER-Okay. "To Whom It May Concern: I would like to state
my position that do not want a mobile home located on Division
Road. But, at the same time I do not want to offend my neighbors,
so I will not sign this letter. My hope is that the Zoning Board
follows its own codes and enforces not allowing a mobile home
outside of a Mobile Home Overlay Zone. Please do not lower my
property value! Do not allow a mobile home on this road! A
concerned citizen of Division Road" And it was written on June
13th, 1994.
MR. MENTER-Do we enter unsigned letters?
MR. TURNER-It's a
sign it anyway.
letter.
concerned citizen.
They called there,
They called, and wouldn't
and that's the follow up
MR. DELONG-Can I just ask a question? If that letter's not signed,
and you don't know who it's by, how can that letter mean anything
to this meeting here, as far as the people?
MR. TURNER-I don't think it really is, Mr. DeLong, but it is signed
by a concerned citizen of Division Road.
MR. DELONG-I understand that. I'm just asking, how can that affect
the opinion of you people here, when I don't even know who the
people are, if I could talk to them, or whatever.
MR. TURNER-I don't think that
Board's opinion at all. Okay.
letter is going to reflect
Any discussion on it?
on the
MR. CARVIN-How would you address
devaluation of the property values?
Mr. Tucker's issue of the
What is your feeling there?
MR. DELONG-I understand Pliney Tucker, and I (lost word), but by
the same token, I don't see where we're going to bring the value of
his property down. He's down the street, and our mobile home is a
fairly new home, and we keep it up, and it's not going to look like
the one that's down the road, but that's only my word against his
word. If I owned a home, I would understand what Pliney's saying.
So I can't, again, go against him. If I owned a home, I'd probably
feel the same way. We're here because we're trying to put a mobile
home on a subdivision lot, to help her parents, and we have to go
through this for the variance and everything, and that's what we're
try i n g to do. We' l' e not try i n g t 0 h u r tan y bod y 0 r ma k e h a l' d
feelings. We're just going by what we're supposed to do, as far as
planning.
MRS. DELONG-We'd even be willing to put a fence so no one could see
the mobile home.
MR. DELONG-Whatever it takes to satisfy somebody, we'll do.
MRS. DELONG-We don't want to argue. It's just for me to take care
of my parents, because the easiest would be to live right next to
them. It's very hard for two families to live in the same house.
That's the main reason we are trying to get our mobile home right
next to my parents. So we still have our own home, but I'm right
next door, so if something happens.
- 14 -
--,'
-
MR. DELONG-It's not like the home is going to be on wheels. We're
putting it on a foundation.
MR. TURNER-I understand, and I told you before. This doesn't deal
with personalities, or your personal position. It deals with the
use of the land, and that's all we're interested in is the use of
the land.
MR. DELONG-I agree with you 100 percent.
MR. TURNER-We've had other applications of a similar nature to
locate mobile homes on lots to take care of parents, and sick
relatives, and that's not the criteria for a variance. If they're
going to subdivide the lot, they can build a house on it.
MR. MENTER-In my view, there's certain criteria that need to be met
to continue considering the other factors, and one of them is
reasonable return, that it cannot realize a reasonable return
without taking this action. As Ted says, it's not a personality
thing, and the situation certainly justifies consideration, but if
you can't get by that, I think it's, it would be technically
incorrect to do anything further.
MR. DELONG-I understand what you're saying 100 percent. What I'm
trying to explain is, we wanted to move the mobile home, there's
steps that we had to take, and we took those steps, and that's why
we're here tonight. What you guy decide, we're not trying to (lost
word). We didn't know what we had to do, so this lady over here
helped us most of the way through it, and that's why we're here.
MR. TURNER-Okay, but, you know, I'm just trying to tell you where
I'm coming from, and we've had these similar instances before, and
they don't fly, because it has to deal with the land, not anything
else, and that's where it stands. You have to meet the criteria
for a variance, and you're not doing it. No further discussion?
Motion's in order.
MOTION TO DENY USE VARIANCE NO. 29-1994 RONALD &. VIVIAN DELONG,
Introduced by Fred Carvin who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Robert Karpeles:
The applicant is applying for relief from Section 179-29, which
designates areas where mobile homes are allowed. The applicant has
not proven that a reasonable return is not possible if the land is
used as zoned. The applicant is also seeking relief from Section
179-19D, and again, the applicant has not shown that a reasonable
return is not possible if the land is used as zoned. It is also
felt that a possible adverse effect on the essential character of
the neighborhood would be created if this variance is granted.
Duly adopted this 15th day of June, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Miss Hauser,
Mr. Maresco, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Thomas
SIGN VARIANCE NO. 30---1994 TYPE: UNLISTED PC-IA ILIAD LTD.
D/B/A BRUEGGER'S BAGEL BAKERY OWNER: ILENE FLAUM ROUTE 9 AND 254
QUEENSBURY PLAZA SECTION 140-6 OF THE SIGN ORDINANCE ALLOWS EACH
OCCUPANT OF A BUSINESS COMPLEX ONE (1) WALL SIGN. APPLICANT
PROPOSES TO INSTALL ONE (1) WALL SIGN ON THE GLEN STREET SIDE, AND
A LOGO ON THE WEST SIDE OF THIS CORNER LOCATION, FACING ROUTE 9 AND
254. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) 6/8/94 TAX MAP NO. 103-1-1.2 LOT
SIZE: 12.63 ACRES SECTION 140-6
JON LAPPER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
15 -
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Staff, Sign Variance No. 30-1994, Iliad Ltd. d/b/a
Bruegger's Bagel Bakery, Meeting Date: June 15,1994 "APPLICANT:
Iliad Ltd. d/b/a Bruegger's Bagel Bakery PROJECT LOCATION: Route
9 & 254, Queensbury Plaza (west end of Queensbury Plaza) PROPOSED
ACTION: Applicant proposes to install a sixty-five (65) square
foot wall sign on the Route 9 side of the store, and a nineteen and
eight tenths (19.8) square foot logo on the west side of the store,
facing the Route 9/254 intersection. CONFORMANCE WITH USE/AREA
REGULATIONS: Section 140-6 of the Sign Ordinance allows one wall
sign of up to 100 square feet at this location. Applicant is
proposing an additional logo sign, but the combined square footage
of the two signs will be 1 ess than 100 squar e fee t . REASON FOR
VARIANCE REQUEST, AND BENEFIT TO APPLICANT: This is a corner
location, an visibility from the Route 9 and 254 intersection, as
well as the Route 9 side, would be desirable. FEASIBLE
ALTERNATIVES: There is no alternative to accomplish the same
result without a variance. IS THIS RELIEF SUBSTANTIAL?: This logo
sign seems to be the minimum relief needed to accomplish the
objective. EFFECTS ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMUNITY: It does not
appear that this sign would have an adverse impact on the
community. No public comment has been received as of this writing.
IS THIS DIFFICULTY SELF-CREATED?: The difficulty appears to be the
inability of the building to be seen from the major intersection.
The Olive Garden restaurant presented a similar difficulty. PARCEL
HISTORY: This particular store location is what used to be the end
of the building, before the restaurant was constructed. A facade
plan for the Queensbury Plaza is currently under review by the
Planning Board, and this proposal appears to agree with it. STAFF
COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: No further comment. SEQR: This is an
Unlisted Action. The Short Form EAF needs to be reviewed."
MISS HAUSER-On June 8th, 1994, the Warren County Planning Board
recommended to disapprove this variance. Their comment, "The
Warren County Planning Board believes that the applicant should
conform to the Town of Queensbury Sign Ordinance. The Town of
Queensbury allows only one wall sign and it is noted that the Board
believes that the applicant's logo is also considered a sign."
MR. TURNER-Okay. Mr. Lapper.
MR. LAPPER--Mr. Chairman, with me tonight is George Neil from
Bruegger's, and Howard Carr, Manager of the Plaza, who's also here
to answer questions. I guess, to start wi th, we recognize how
seriously this Board takes the Queensbury Sign Ordinance. We think
that we've got a real legitimate issue here. To start with, what
we mentioned in the application, the two signs together that we're
asking for are less than the total square footage, 100 square feet,
that's required. These together are less than 85 square feet. The
issue for my client is visibility, as the cars are coming south,
mostly, on Route 9, and they just feel that unlike other sites
within the Plaza, which is included in the application, it's really
a matter of the angle. When you're coming south, you just can't
see Bruegger's because it's the first, because they're going to
take the first site. You can't see it when you're driving south on
Route 9. When you turn to the left, if you're coming past the
Plaza, you'll see the other uses in the Plaza that are farther in,
but this one you just have to turn your head so far back, it's a
visibility issue, and this type of a business, drive by traffic is
important, commuter traffic is important. What we're looking for
is just a small sign on the blanket side which, of course, used to
be the corner parcel, with just their logo. It's 19 square feet.
It's just their logo. It's not so much that you could even read
that sign, because of the size, from the road, more just for
identification. That is just a very simple, tasteful neon sign
that would be on a white background, for people to identify it, the
shape of the logo as a bagel, and it'll just draw people in to make
the business viable. I think Mr. Neil would like to address the
Boar as well.
-- 16 -
'-/
'-
GEORGE NEIL
MR. NE I L-- I'd 1 i ke to thank you for your time. Our appr oach to
coming in to the market place and identifying the center as an
opportunity for us was greatly thought out. We had been looking in
this market for a number of years, and when we took a look at the
opportunity to go into this Center, the site that we selected was
based upon trying to obtain maximum visibility from what we think
is the most significant intersection for vehicle traffic in
QueensburyjGlens Falls community. In looking at what was available
to us, we felt that there was also a significant amount of tourism
which does, in fact, avail itself of traveling south on Route 9,
approaching the intersection to Route 254, which, once again, may
or may not know, after we're in the market place, that we're here,
because they are not regular, year round residents of the
community. The logo sign that we have requested has been our brand
name identification trademark since the conception of the business,
and we felt that the modest size we requested would satisfy the
need to create that recognition in the market place, from almost
(lost word) people who would not see us, standard commuters.
MR. TURNER--All right. I've got to take issue with you. Coming
down Route 9, you can see that building very clearly. You can see
Rex. You can see eve r yon e 0 f them. You can see i t from 254.
You've got to hang your head to the left, like this, with 254, if
you're going west, b~t if you're coming down Aviation Road, it hits
you right in the face.
MR. LAPPER~I'm looking at the map, Mr. Turner, but I guess, when
you say, when you're coming down.
MR. TURNER-Route 9 from the north.
MR. LAPPER-When you're coming, north on Route 9, there's certainly
no issue. What we're concerned with is people coming south on
Route 9, sitting in the intersection.
MR. TURNER-Yes. I'm sorry.
that building completely.
travel it every day.
If going south on Route 9, you can see
You can see the whole front of it. I
MR. LAPPER-This is a picture of the layout, and our point is that
w hen you' r e t r a vel i n g her e , I mea n, you ma y see it, i f you' r e
driving, and you're looking over to the left, just the angle is
right here. You're not going to see it until you're already past
it, until you're down here. You're going to look in, and you can
see all the stuff here, but here, it's really, you have to turn
your neck backwards.
MR. TURNER-I know, but if you're coming in the area to shop, you're
going to carouse around all these shopping centers. You're going
to find what's there. You're going to know what's there, and
you're going to be able to see this building. You're going to be
able to see the sign that's on the front of the building.
MR . CAR V IN - I was go i n g to say, i s n 't the rea f r e est and i n g s 1 g n
that's down the road, by the entrance?
MR. TURNER-Yes, but the thing of it is, you know, you re well aware
that the Sign Ordinance has changed, that you can put your name out
on the sign out by the road, now, if you've got room enough, okay.
MR. LAPPER-Yes. That's an option, but what
the logo. What we're looking for is the
something that you can put on the sign.
,
we re
logo,
looking
which
for is
1 s no t
MR. TURNER-I don't agree with you, because I think, I really think
you can see that building very clearly, with no problem at all.
MR. LAPPER-I guess, another way to look at this is that, the other
- 17-
prong of the test for an Area Variance, or Sign Variance, is the
impact on the area.
MR. TURNER-I think it will impact the area, because you re first in
line. Then comes somebody else. What are you going to do about
the guy that's down farther, that doesn't jut out? Do you want to
put a sign up by 254?
MR. CARVIN-I was going to say, is Strawberries part of this Plaza?
MS. CIPPERLY-Yes.
MR. CARVIN-Okay. Now if Strawberries came in and said that they
want to put a sign right where Y.illd. are proposing to put a sign, as
far as the shopping plaza is concerned, would they be allowed to
apply for that?
MR. LAPPER-No. They can't argue that they're a corner.
this is the corner of the building.
I mean,
MR. TURNER-That's not a corner. That building's in
corner. That's the first building In from the corner.
Ga r den i s the fir s t b u i 1 din g 0 nth e cor n e r . T hat's
building.
f rom the
The Olive
the corner
MR. CARVIN-You see, I think Stawberries or one of these other, like
Ted says, I think if you moved down the line, I mean, they have
probably a more legitimate claim to not being seen than what the
Bruegger's does.
MR. LAPPER-Well, the Ordinance addresses that, because the farther
you get in, the more square feet you're allowed. They could have
a larger sign because they're farther from the road, but in terms
of the corner, the only people that would be looking at the
Strawberries, the only people on the west of Strawberries, people
inside in one of the other buildings. It's not, there's no issue,
there's no visibility from the west side, from Strawberries, but
this is the corner of the facade of the Plaza. Just like Olive
Garden, argues, I mean, they're a little bit farther west, but.
MR. TURNER-They're farther west because that's the way the building
was built, and the facade of the building that's there was the old
Boardman building. Is that not correct?
MR. LAPPER-Right, the old A & P.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. LAPPER- I guess we would I ike to show you that we've got,
Bruegger's has a real serious issue there, in terms of the
viability of the site, that they are afraid that just being on a
corner there, that people don't see them coming from all
directions, that they're not going to know that they're there.
MR. TURNER-I've got to tell you something. Bruegger's won't have
a probl em once they go in ther e, because if they make a good
product, they're going to get clientele. Signs don't necessarily
bring the clientele. You've got to have a good product to bring
the clientele.
MR. LAPPER-They do make a good product.
very tasteful sign.
Well, they also have a
MR. TURNER-That's fine, but you can put 100 square foot on the
front of that building, and you can identify yourself, and that's
what the Ordinance says. You don't have any practical difficulty.
You're making your own difficulty.
MR. KARPELES-How far away can that sign be read, this logo?
- 18 -
-./
MR. TURNER-It can't be read.
MR. LAPPER-The sign on the front, or the sign we're asking for on
the side?
MR. KARPELES- The logo, the one you want to put on, the circular
one?
MR. LAPPER-You can see it a great distance.
MR. KARPELES-No, I mean read it, so that you know, identify what it
is.
MR. NEIL--I think, if I can respond to that, part of what we're
sharing with you is the fact that this is, to us, in a similar
circumstance, what the Golden Arches "M", is to McDonalds. When
you see that, you recognize that it's their trademark. Therefore,
you can easily identify the property. I think that, in terms of,
one of the reasons why we're asking for this variance is that,
unlike Strawberries or another destination shop retailer, the
intensity of the competition for what the industry has referred to
as "share of stomach" is dramatic, within that particular
intersection as zoned. If you notice the number of different and
distinctive food service operations there, ranging from Kentucky
Fried Chicken, to Pizza Hut, to McDonalds, to two Friendlys, to
Burger King, to Taco Bell coming into the market. I think that it
really is a distinctive competitive disadvantage not to be visible
in the market place, because we are a food service entity. We are
seeking to become a reasonably, I think, successful entity in the
market place.
MR. KARPELES-I don't think you answered my question. How far away
can that sign be read?
MR. NEIL-Without having the sign, I can't tell you that, at this
point. I've been told by people who can see the building that they
bel i eve the y co u 1 d I' e ado u I' Ion g s i g n . My que s t ion is, from a
pE:ripheral depth of field, with a long sign like that, that does
not come out in a raised letter or (lost word). I have trouble
reading the sign. I know what it says, because I've seen it from
the other sign, the Rex sign that say, Audio Visual. If you were
to take the same position on that sign, you cannot read the words
"Audio Visual" because of the depth of field that's required to do
that. Which is why a facia sign, looking at that intersection, is
what we're seeking.
MR. CARVIN-See, again, I think the only, all right, if you are
coming south down Route 9, that that sign will have very little
impact, because of the angle of the Olive Garden. Anybody coming
south, that sign that's on the Olive Garden on that site is not
visible from almost anybody coming south. Coming down, from the
west, down Aviation Road into that intersection, you can look up
the whole length of that mall, and you can see.
MR. TURNER-Everything that's there.
MR. CARVIN-So, I don't think you're going to have a problem for
people coming down Aviation Road. You certainly won't have any
problem from people going north up Route 9, because that sign, you
know, you're out on the front corner. So I really have a hard time
justifying hanging the logo sign right there. I just don't think
it's going to be a benefit, and I don't, I think it's just one more
sign.
MR. NEIL-I think that if, from positioning in anyone of the three
lanes that face that intersection and come from the west, from Exit
19 of the throughway, your positioning would need to be nearly
perfect to see the sign that would face Route 9, because in
addition to the fact that you have signs that already exist with
Burger King, with Mobil, you have green space planting of trees
- 19
that are in existence there. There is a very limited scope of
opportunity, and almost a requirement of perfect positioning within
a two or three vehicle length to be able to see this and stop and
that is our position, is that that sign that we're seeking o~ the
side, modest in size, but totally recognizable, within the context
of what we do from a marketing standpoint, would be of great value
to us in order to allow us to become successful in the market.
MR. CARVIN-Let me
freestanding sign?
ask you this. Is there going to be
There's no freestanding sign, out front?
a
MR. LAPPER-No.
MR. TURNER-They've got the one for the Plaza.
MR. CARVIN-Just for the Plaza?
HOWARD CARR
MR. CARR-I think I should address the Board on that issue. For the
record, my name's Howard Carr. There is not going to be any other
pylon sign other than one that identifies the Center, as far as we
know, at this particular point in time. We fought tooth and naU
to retain that, because our feel ing is, if you were to take a
Center that has the opportunity, at this point, I believe, to have
18 different tenants in it, 18 or 19 different tenants, if we were
to put a directory board up there, you can't read it. If we put 18
or 19 names, you'll never.
MR. TURNER-They've got to be eight inch letters, anyway, Howard.
MR. CARR-Well, eight inch letters, we do twenty of them, that's one
hundred and sixty inches. We're going to have probably the biggest
sign in all of Queensbury.
MR. TURNER--No. You have to fit it within the signage that's
allowed. So you can't fit it there.
MR. CARR-We have a problem, and we recognize that fact. We
recognize the fact that the height is an issue, but the issue that
he brings forth, I really believe, has some merit. He's in a
business that is not driven, similar to, like, well, I'm going to
go buy a tv. It's not a destination where you sit home, and you
say, okay, we're going to go out and look at televisions tonight,
or we're going to look at stereos. These entities include
bus in e sse simp u I sed r i v en, in t his t y p e 0 f bus i n e s s , I i k e a
McDonalds, like a Taco Bell, and a lot of times, okay, and what he
says is true, okay. He's fighting for that dollar, and that dollar
has an impact on him, and that's why, okay, morning, which is the
biggest single part of the bagel business, bagel and coffee, that
type of thing, okay, he needs that impulse. He needs that
individual to see that sign and say, I've got enough time to get
over. Make a left turn, because we've got the traffic light. The
landlord has made the investment of $185,000 in this traffic light
system, all right, so that they can come in. They relocated the
entrance drive, further south, south on 9, all right, and installed
a traffic light, and now this gives him the opportunity to catch
that morning business, and that's really what we're talking about,
here, is that, you know, I've been sitting here listening to the
Board's concerns, and I guess I have a question that I would throw
out, and no one's asked us yet, and we haven't even discussed it,
but I think if you attached the signs together and wrapped them
around the building, I think the sign becomes legal, because it's
within the 100 square feet. I don't think it's the best thing, but
I think it works within, the way the Ordinance is written, but I
think this is really coming up with something that's better.
MR. TURNER-You can't claim that building as a corner building. How
are you going to wrap it around the corner? That's not a corner
building. The corner building's the Olive Garden Restaurant.
- 20 -
--'
--
MR. LAPPER-What Howard means IS that if they were attached.
MR. TURNER-I know.
I know what he's saying.
MR. LAPPER-I'd just like to explore that for a second, if could.
Because the issue, in terms of, what this Board is trying to do, in
terms of protect the Town, in terms of not creating something that,
visually, is an eyesore, or IS too much, in terms of signage,
because we're looking for two signs together, that are a lot, a
number of square feet less than the one hundred that's approved,
the distance of the sign, the round sign that we're asking for, is
so close to the corner, and the distance of the front sign, because
it's not a big facade. It's not big store, it's so close to the
corner as well, I mean, just visually, like, if you're coming south
and you're looking at this from the south, going north, looking at
the two together, I would just argue that it's not that big a
difference, in terms of the impact on anybody, if you took them,
moved this to the front, if you used the 100 square feet, and they
don't want to use the 100 square feet, because they want it to be
small and tasteful, but with the two existing a few feet away, it's
just not that big a difference. It's not that big an impact, in
terms of anyone driving by. It just helps the people sitting in
the intersection coming south, and knowing that there's a bagel
shop there.
MR. TURNER Jon, you can see that place as plain as the nose on your
face, going south, right from the intersection.
MR. LAPPER-When you're coming south?
MR. TURNER-Yes, sir. Try it. Take a look at it when you try it.
Take a look. When you're con1ing down 9, coming towards the City,
at Route 9 and 254, you can see the front of that building. When
you'r~ in route, you can see the front of that building. You can
see Rex. You can look right down that row.
MR. LAPPER --Wh en , sitting, wa i ti ng for the light to change?
you re
MR. TURNER-Absolutely, and you can even see it better coming from
the west.
MR. LAPPER-I think you can see it from the west, In the right turn
lane, coming from the north.
MR. TURNER-You can see it any place, because when you come down the
crest of that hill, you're looking right at it. The only thing
that blocks your view is the top of the Mobil Station. Once you
get by the corner of it, you can see that whole thing.
MR. LAPPER-You're talking about the top of the Mobil Station,
you're talking about con1ing down Route, Aviation Road?
MR. TURNER-From the west, yes.
MR. LAPPER-- I'm talking about coming down from the north.
MR. TURNER-I know you are. You can see it from that direction,
very plain. You don't live here. do, and I understand your
position, but the Town has bent over backwards. We just modified
the Sign Ordinance, and maybe it's not an option to you, but we did
it because we had a lot of requests to do what we did. You have an
option to put a 100 square foot sign on the front of that building,
without the logo.
MR. NEIL-Mr. Turner, I handle all of the real estate development
for my Company, as well as the fact that I'm the managing partner
of this Company, so I do all of the site selection work. I have
been spending close to five years at that intersection. I live in
Saratoga Springs, so it's not that dramatic of a drive to come up
here. r try to identify what I think would be the perfect spot to
- 21
place a location in the community, and have, I travelled that
road north, south, east, and west, from every possible vantage
point, to try to understand whether or not that site would work for
us. The overriding conclusion that has been made is that it is
very significant to have that signage, or we would not request it.
I think from the number of locations that we currently have in the
greater Capital District, and those that are pending under
construction or in review process, that we have been responsive,
and have been good corporate citizens where we've gone, and I
basically don't go to very many variance hearings. What I offered
to the Board, in the package that we submitted, was a similar
scenario that exists on Western Avenue in Downtown Albany, all
right, Downtown Albany, Gui IdeI' land, in between the Crossgates
Plaza, and the con~unity of Guilderland, and once again, what we
faced was the fact that we have frontage, but we also have a
significant need for visibility, because of our definitive need for
commuter traffic. We are not specifically a destination shop, and
the second aspect of that is that there are currently two other
bagel bakeries doing business in the Queensbury/Glens Falls market,
and one of them followed one that failed, and there are two closed
bagel bakeries in the Glens Falls/Queensbury market. So, my
overview is that I think it is an intensely competitive market for
what we are about to provide in the community, and we are asking
relief from this, only to be able to be a reasonable competitor in
what we believe is.
MR. TURNER-But you agree, you ve got to have a good product to be
a viable entity. That's more important than the sign.
MR. NEIL-I think that a good product is a very significant part of
any company's success in the food serv ice indus try. From our
perspective, I think I've always relied on the perspective that
Conrad Hi I ton dedicated to the hospi tal i ty industry a number of
years ago, location, location, location, and it needs to be very
visible, and as long as we will approach it tastefully, we would
ask that the Board give us consideration for what we have asked for
at this time.
MR. MARESCO-Do all of Bruegger's have the same logo?
MR. NEIL-Yes, that's correct.
MR. TURNER-This is a Company policy, then.
MR. KARPELES-How many are there?
MR. NEIL-We have 14 at this time, our 14th is under construction,
and we'll open on the 8th of July in Builder's Square in Albany,
and this is projected to be our 15th or 16th location, depending on
what happens in the Rotterdam Mall project, whether that con1es on
line before this.
MR. TURNER-Where did you take this picture from?
intersection of 9 and 254 at the top of the hill?
Right at the
MR. NEIL-No. took that picture from the front of the facade. I
was actually in the parking lot, okay. took the picture to
provide a vantage point.
MR. TURNER-Way up, in the corner here?
MR. NEIL-Approximately there, Mr. Turner, yes.
MR. TURNER-So you see how visible it is?
MR. NEIL-Well, it is from that position, because of the fact that
I'm along the south side of the facia of the business.
MR. TURNER-That's the way it line up with Route 9, just like that,
if you look at it.
- 22 -
'-"'"
''"--
MR. NEIL-I'm not here to debate how it lines up. I can only tell
you, visually, that I find the footprint of the site has to be
something that lines up from a visible position, coming south on
Route 9, until after you have crossed into the intersection and are
already on the southern side of it.
MR. TURNER -- Bu t
designation, more
the purpose of
than anything.
the
logo
is
really
company
MR. N ElL - No. The pur po s e 0 f the log 0, 0 k a y, i s toe s tab 1 ish 0 u r
recognition as a competitor in the community, and as for guidance.
MR. TURNER-That's the lQRQ.
MR. NE I L-Our logo
signage, I think,
i s a 1 way s t hat. The ma t t e I' t hat i s use d
is a common denominator in most industries.
as
MR. TURNER-Anybody else? Again, I really think the Town has gone
quite a ways in trying to correct some serious problems we had with
the Sign Ordinance. I think you can identify yourself with the
sign on the front of the building without the logo. That's my
feeling. I don't see any practical difficulty for it.
MR. MENTER-It's illY view that, I'm not sure that the uniqueness is
in question. You have a corner which gives you a potential for
much greater signage, but does that make it unique to the other
ones, because you have that initial potential? My point is that,
being in a front, corner store, you do have, you have the potential
to use that other front wall, but I don't see that having that
added potential. Comparing yourself to Rex and the other stores
down the 1 ine makes you unique to a (lost word). I mean, that's a
potentiality that you have.
MR. NEIL-I think that's part of the value that the space offers,
which is why we were considering securing a lease on the space,
that it offered the ability for, what we think is great visibility
in the market place. We would not consider an in line space in
that Center. Mr. Carr knows my Company well enough to know that I
speak the truth on that.
MR. LAP PER-In terms of a land use issue, it's the angle that's
created, because it's so close to the road, that we think makes a
visibility problem, you have to turn your neck so severely. That's
how it gets related to a land use issue, and the difficulty for us.
MR. CARVIN-Do you think Rex has any greater problem because they're
the next one over?
MR. LAP PER-No. I think Rex has less of a problem, for that reason,
because they're already, once you come next to it, they're farther
in. It's easier to see them. You don't have to look backwards
over your shoulder, but they also have many more square feet, and
their signs are much bigger than we're (lost word).
MR. CARVIN-Okay, but I don't think it was two weeks ago, or last
month, I think it was, that Rex, they wanted extra signage, and we
made them come into compliance, and, you know, they're right next
door. It's not like they're at the other end of the mall.
MR. LAP PER-True, but they don't have a corner site.
MR. TURNER-That's not a corner site, Jon. I'll disagree with you
100 percent. You're not on a corner. You're in the interior of
the mall. Just because the facade juts out more than the other
building, that doesn't make you a corner building.
MR. NEIL-I think, in evaluating it, what we'd look at is the fact
that, A, it does, in fact, create a corner. How we call it a
corner of the building or corner of the site it li a corner. There
is a distinctive 90 degree angle with a rather large facia that
23 --
exists there, and from that perspective, I think that it does
qualify as preceding, corner, but it's not our concern at that
level. We also think that the nature of the business is different
than an appliance store business. The frequency with which you
would go out and buy, like a 23 inch color television, a washer, a
dryer, is far different than the frequency with which you would
spend disposal income from your household budget.
MR . CAR V I N - I t a k e e xc e p t ion tot h e f act t hat you' rea cor n e r .
That's a walkway. Suppose the corner was at Rex? Then what would
you do? This is a walkway. I mean, that's not a corner. That's
not part of the building. Lets say that this wasn't here, and that
the corner was at the Rex, then what happens?
MR. NEIL-I would lease that space instead.
MR. CARVIN-So,
mean, we could move that right down the line.
MR. NEIL-I think there's a point of diminishing (lost word) with
that.
MR. CARVIN-Well, suppose, again, I don't know, if the mall were to
cut that off, I mean, everyone of those could have corners, if
they were to break this up, and I'm not proposing that, but is that
not the case?
MR. LAPPER-Well, there aren't corners elsewhere, but also, this was
a store, this was the old A & P, so this was the corner, and that
was preexisting, even with what they're saying, that that covers
the (lost word).
MR. CARVIN-Okay, but on the other hand, you decided to build the
Olive Garden, so, I mean, that changed the corner. I mean, if you
take this off, it becomes a straight line.
MR. CARR-I think what you're saying is if you keep chopping the
facade back.
MR. CARVIN-Yes, everybody has a corner.
MR. CARR-Well, but you'll never see them.
MR. CARVIN-You could alter the sites. Do you know what I'm saying?
I mean, it's not a corner, corner, is what I'm saying.
MR. TURNER-It's not the corner of the lot that faces the roadway.
MR. CARVIN-You're making an argument that it's a corner shop. It
just happens that there's a 90 degree angle there, but it's not the
corner, it's not a corner in the traditional sense, like it is out
here. This is the actual building. This is just an overhang.
MS. CIPPERLY-There isn't really anything in the Sign Ordinance that
says you have to have a defined corner in order to have.
MR. TURNER-No. He's making the issue that that's the corner.
That's not the corner. The next building over sits on the corner.
MS. CIPPERLY-Okay, because if this were an individual business, and
it were on the corner of two streets, it would be allowed a sign on
each side of the building, but this being in a business complex.
MR. TURNER-Yes, but not in a shopping plaza.
MR. MENTER-See, I don't think that's the issue. I think the issue
that they're talking about is the fact that you have a diminished
visibility, because at the point where you're in front there, you
have to turn at a much greater angle to view the front, and that
may be, and I, is that accurate?
- 24 -
-'
'--
MR. LAPPER-That li our point.
MR. TURNER-That gives you a real limited view, because you can only
stack a few cars there, at 254 coming west, at the top of the
grade, you can only stack a few cars there, to even begin to see
that.
MR. NEIL-Mr. Turner, if I could make a clarification, what exists
on the photograph, on the property that I show you on Western
Avenue, addresses that specific need, and the fact that that
traffic, at that particular point, traveling 35 to 40 miles an
hour, if you were bound towards Al bany, al I right, to rely on
someone being able to make that 90 degree angle contact with the
sign that is on the facia of the building is not a reasonable
opportunity for us to do business, which is why we requested and
were given the opportunity to place our round logo, okay, which is
significantly smaller than the one we've asked for in this
particular application, becausf) it does address the issue of
immediate brand recognition, and I think the brand recognition is
really what we needed in a competitive market place.
MR. TURNER-Let me say this to you, if you're coming from the east,
going west, and you come to the top of that grade, and that light
is green, you don't have a chance to turn your head to the left,
because if you do, that light might change in front of you, and
you're going to rear end somebody. That's how dangerous that
intersection is.
MR. NEIL-I wouldn't doubt that, but I think the question would be,
is that, how many times a day does the light change?
MR. TURNER-Plenty, a good many times a day.
MR. NEIL-Okay, and traffic does approach it, and does slow down.
MR. TURNER-That's fine, but you have a limited view of what you say
is the corner, very limited. That stacking area doesn't
accommodate very many people.
MR. CARR-If I may, let me just show the Board a little, very
elementary geometry. I think that the biggest issue, or the
concern is, that if you take and draw a straight line down Glen
Street, which would be the continuation of the intersection, and
you then draw a line and just basically take the facade and carry
it all the way out, going in a westerly direction, where the two
points meet, it creates an angle of about 135 degrees. That would
mean that if I was driving my car, to be able to see that sign, I
don't think I could turn my head 135 degrees. So that the other
members of the Board can see what I'm referring to, if you take
this line and then extend this out, okay, this creates an angle of
about 135 degrees, so that if you're driving down Route 9, south
bound, I don't think that you could see, if you're on the north
side of the intersection. You have no way to see the face of the
building, because you can't see around 135, you can't see around a
90 degree corner.
MR. CARVIN-I just think that that makes for more of an argument for
Strawberries having a sign out there, not Bruegger's.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. CARR-Mr. Carvin, I agree with what you're saying, but remember
what I explained to this Board two weeks ago. This is a shopping
center. A shopping center becomes an amalgamation of tenants, all
right. Part of that amalgamation is impulse tenants, food driven
tenants, destination tenants. That is basically what it all
becomes, all right. This type of business is part of that impulse
food business. When you're going to Strawberries, you don't just
drive down the road, at eight o'clock in the morning, on your way
to work, and say, I'm going to run in and grab a CD.
- 25
MR. CARVIN-Okay. I'm using Strawberries as an example, and I don't
care if it was Long John Silvers. mean, if you had another food
tenant down where Strawberries is, I mean, wouldn't they have a
better argument to get the logo out on that spot?
MR. CARR-Yes, but understand, we are concerned with what the mix of
tenancy is. I won't put 26 bagel stores in there.
MR. TURNER-Okay. I've got a question for you.
about bringing a Red Lobster in there, right?
You're talking
MR. CARR-Yes.
MR. TURNER-If that goes, what does that do to Mr. Neil's Bruegger's
Bagels? Doesn't that really give him exposure?
MR. CARR-Give who exposure?
MR. TURNER-Mr. Neil.
MR. CARR-Does it give him exposure?
MR. TURNER-That brings more traffic into that Center than was ever
there before. You know it and 1 know it, and they're going to be
local people, most of them, a lot of them. There are going to be
a few off the Northway, but most of the people that go there are
going to be local people. He's going to be identified with them,
and he's going to be in there, and he's going to make money. He's
going to have a good business. If he's got a good product, he's
going to have a good business. That's the bottom line. If you
don't have a good product, forget it. The sign doesn't mean
anything.
MR. CARR-Mr. Turner, I don't disagree with what you've said. I'm
in a thousand percent agreement with you, because I can tell you,
if he was not a good operate, we wouldn't put him in there. You
people, if anybody, in this Township, knows what this property has
gone through, and members of this Board, along with the members of
the Town Board and the Planning Board know what lE gone through
in getting this place rented.
MR. TURNER-We certainly do, and I think we've done a remarkable job
trying to get you back on schedule, but don't come in here and say,
because Bruegger's Bagel is coming to Town, we've got to have a
logo sign on the end of the building because it's a corner, and I
totally disagree with you. He has other options. He has other
alternatives, and he refuses to explore them. We're here to
protect the Ordinance, and that's what it's all about.
MR. CARR-Well, if I could just finish the point of view that I have
on this, nobody here on the Board, okay, is willing to guarantee
their success, nor is the landlord's position, but I agree with
you, that if they've got a good product, you're right. However,
part of what a shopping center is all about is that we're going to
deal, hopefully, we're going to build a customer base from the
local people in Queensbury, Fort Edward, Hudson Falls, etc., but
also part of that is typical of last weekend, when the Americade
b r 0 ugh t , I don't k now, 20 , 000 p e 0 pie 0 r mo rei n tot his ma r k e t
place, that according to the newspaper spent in excess of six
million dollars. That's part of the reason that Mr. Neil wants to
locate a store here, to pick up that benefit from that tourism.
The guy who drives in from Connecticut on his motorcycle, or his
car, or his RV, he doesn't know that Bruegger's is there, but when
he comes down 254 from 19, he has no way, easily, to see that
thing, because remember, now, he's a stranger in Town. The worst
situation is, and the thing that Mr. Neil's most concerned with,
and that he expressed to me, is what happens when I get, because
the real resort area, here, is Lake George. What happens when that
person rides down Route 9, all right? How do I get him now? How
dol cap t u r e his i n t ere s t toe om e i n t 0 illY s tor e? An d t hat's the
- 26 -
"-,
issue of that sign.
MR. TURNER-I've got to tell you, Americade doesn't have any problem
finding places to go and shop, and pick up things. They're all
over the place.
MR. MENTER-"You folks are getting paid to make those decisions.
We're not. We're getting paid to determine if this is unique or
not, and that's what we should be limiting this conversation to.
MR. TURNER-That's right.
MR. MENTER-I mean, of course you want to maximize your signage and
your visibility and recognition. We need to kind of center the
discussion here a little bit, I think.
MR. TURNER -Okay.
public hearing.
Any more questions?
Okay.
Let me open the
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. CAR V IN"" I w 0 u I d I i k e top 0 i n t 0 u t t hat the Co u n t y did d i sap pro V e
this.
MR. TURNER-It's a majority plus one.
MR. CARVIN-It's got to be a majority plus one.
MR. TURNER--I 've got to tell you that this would open an awful can
of worms. This would set one heck of a precedent, especially when
the Town has gone to the trouble of changing the Sign Ordinance.
Maybe they can't, it doesn't fit within their scope, but he has
other alternatives.
MR. MENTER-Well, 1 think, at this point, that there is, and I would
have to go back and look at it, to be honest with you. There is a
possibility that, and it hit me that, as you approach it, you know,
from that whole side, that really there's a visibility problem, and
I wouldn't be willing to.
MR. TURNER-From 254 or 9?
MR. MENTER-Nine, and hearing what I've heard tonight, I would need
to go back and look at it, personally, to do anything with this.
MR. TURNER-So you wouldn't vote then. You would abstain? Is that
what you're saying?
MR. MENTER"-No.
MS. CIPPERLY-There could be the possibility you could table this,
even to next week, if you want to go back to look at it.
MR. MENTER-Yes, would certainly go for that, because
comfortable enough with it, and at one point, I understood
d y n am i c s 0 f t hat cor n e I' ma y ma k e i tun i que I y d iff i cui t
relative to the rest of the strip. I'm just not sure, so
I'm no t
that the
to see,
that's.
MR. CARVIN-Well, again, I made a concerted effort to try to look at
these different angles, and !:!lY feeling is that that is not an
essential spot for a sign, that the visibility is not a problem.
We have Rex right next door, which we brought into conformance last
month. We had Chase Bank right across the street, there, when they
were there, they wanted the logo. We've had Levis. We've had
uncounted, the argument, and not discounting the argument. As I
sa i d, I ma de a pur po set rip 0 u t the rea n d t I' i e d to I 00 kat ita t
27
all the different angles, coming down Route 9, and I will agree
that if you are heading south down Route 9, that all those stores
have a problem. So, how could we allow just one t~ut a sign out
there, and not all the rest?
MR. MENTER-I'm not concerned with how visible any of them are, or
they are as a whole. I'm concerned about that one being uniquely
difficult to see.
MR. CARVIN-But I'm saying, it's not any more unique than Rex or
whoever's next to Rex, whose ever next, because they all have that
same problem, and they do have an alternative of making the sign on
the front larger.
MR. TURNER-Bigger. That's all. Yes.
MR. KARPELES-MY feeling is, that's meant to appeal to people coming
down, coming south on Route 9, and coming south on Route 9, you
cannot get close enough to that sign to read it.
MR. CARVIN-That's correct.
MR. KARPELES-The size that it is. That's going to do absolutely no
good.
MR. TURNER-Well, if you look at the size of the facade on the front
of that thing, and it is kind of white in color, and you put that
background of that sign on there, you couldn't miss that with a
gun.
MR. CARVIN-Along the front.
MR. TURNER-Right there.
there, I think it opens
difficulty for that out
with a sign, maybe.
That's what I'm saying. To put that one
up a can of worms. There's no practical
there. They can incorporate it over here
MR. CARVIN-Well, if you want to open up a can of worms, how about
coming east and all along that back side. I mean, they wanted to
put signs there. I mean, nobody can tell, from the back, what's in
there. I guess my feeling, in answer to Dave, is that I don't
think we need to table this. I know I'm comfortable to move on it.
MR. TURNER-Yes, I am, too. When you come down 9, you' rei n the two
lanes, and you have the right turning lane, the guy going right
isn't going to Bruegger's Bagels anyway, but the two guys heading
south, in the two outside lanes, if you come down that hill, you
can see that whole shopping center, everything. There's no
visibility problem there whatsoever, and coming down Aviation Road
it's even more identifiable. I understand what they're trying to
do, but, again, there's no precedent for entertaining a motion to
approve this thing because there's no practical difficulty. To do
that would be to open a can of worms. You're going to have
everybody in here.
MR. LAPPER-Mr. Chairman, we're certainly sensitive to the issue of
precedent. I mean, I've been before this Board enough times. We
wouldn't be asking you to open this up so that it would be
applicable to other uses, other sites in the Town, and we would
only specifically be talking about the fact that the angle of the
facade, that particular location, the angle as compared to the
traffic corridor, we don't think it's applicable to other uses in
the site.
MR. TURNER-Again, the logo isn't going to make them or break them.
The sign on the front of that facade is going to identify
Bruegger's Bagel.
MR. NEIL-Mr. Turner, with all due respect, I think that the logo is
definitely an irrunediate recognition factor to people who already
- 28 -
-'
--
know of our product and our presence. I think the fact that we may
have a location in Queensbury, the convenience of which might go
beyond most people's awareness level as they comnlute up here to go
to a lot of activities in Lake George, and various levels of going
into the Million Dollar Half Mile shopping, on to Rutland,
Killington skiing, and our approach has been, and it's very similar
to (lost word) because I think that if I was McDonalds with a
Golden Arch, I don't think you'd have a problem understanding what
it was, because of the length of time McDonalds has been a player
in the food service industry. We are a new player, comparatively
speaking, but I can assure you that that logo, that round logo, is
a very big part of our recognition. It's placed on all of our
flyer material, on our bags, on our, anything that we do, it is a
viable part of it, and it's because it has that kind of stamp that
says, this is Bruegger's. So I do share that with you. The second
thing I would share with you is that, historically, and I doubt
that this would be any different than any other location we do, we
will do approximately 65 percent of our volume, okay, before noon,
80 percent before two 0' clock in the afternoon. We have a
tremendous reliance on the morning commute. In order to serve
notice to the morning commute, because we are not visible to the
morning commute on three out of the four intersections, or three
out of the four roads hitting that intersection, we need to be
visible to the evening cormnute, in order to make them aware. In
the morning, because of the turning radiuses that are involved, and
we've done focus groups, and we've done studies, and we know that
our customer will typically take a detour of upwards of five
minutes from the normal morning commute, because everybody has a
very short time margin. Therefore, what we're looking for is not
the evolution of finding out that we've ultimately been making in
the ma r k e t, but t hat we are, i n f act, g i v en the 0 p pOl' tun i t Y to
compete in the market, from the standpoint of getting the
visibility that we need, because of the distinct positioning of
that particular Center.
MR. TURNER-That's fine, but in order to get into the Center, coming
from the west, you've got to make a right hand turn, go down Route
9 and go to the light, make a left hand turn, and the same thing
coming from the north going south on 9. You've got to go through
the intersection and go to the next light and make a left to get in
there. So you're going to have visibility from the light to the
intersection, Bruegger's Bagels, right there.
MR. NEIL-I think the question would be, Mr. Turner, that, how would
they see that sign, in the first place, and how long would it take,
and what kind of a cost would it take, okay, to try to bring that
into what I think is the proper mind awareness in this conmlUnity,
which as I've shared with you.
MR. TURNER-You can see it from both directions, Mr. Neil. You can
see it as plain as the nose on your face. I'm telling you. I've
1 i v e d the I' e a 11 my 1 i f e . I don' t m i s sit a bit , and IIi v e he l' e
all the time, and I've seen that mall change, and it's a lot better
looking than it used to be right now.
MR. NEIL-I don't doubt that.
agree with you wholeheartedly.
MR. TURNER-You guys will do well in there, and you don't need that
logo sign on the end of that building.
MR. CARVIN-Yes. Let me tell you, your fame and name precedes you.
MR. NEIL-I can appreciate what everybody's sharing with me, and I'm
flattered that you have that confidence in our product, and I would
hope that we could discuss some short term notes that maybe you
could downsize my risk going into it so we could all share in the
upsize that everybody believes that that's (lost word). I think
Mr. Carr will also tell you, I love having other people share in my
upsizing.
29
MR. TURNER-I think with what they're doing with the mall now, and
if they, like I said before, if they get Red Lobster in there and
they get some other tenants in there, that's going to open that
mall wide open. You are not going to have an identity problem
whatsoever, in fact, you'll have a better identity.
MR. NEIL-My closing comment, in addressing that issue, is that we
have never followed another food service business or any other
retail business to be part of, if you will, their wave of success.
MR. TURNER-You're not following their wave of success.
already in there.
You're
MR. NEIL-No, I think, Mr. Turner, your position is that they will
bring customers to us, because of their trade area.
MR. TURNER-They will bring people there that will see your
business. That's what it's all about.
MR. NEIL-Okay.
MR. TURNER-Okay. The public hearing's closed. What's the Board's
pleasure? Lets do it and get it done with.
MR. LAPPER-Mr. Chairman, would it be possible to just table it for
the one week and let us come back with a better visual
presentation, with some photographs from various places in the
intersection, and have the seventh member of the Board here as
well, for a vote?
MR. TURNER-If it's all right with the Board, but I've already made
illY. mind up, I'll tell you that right now.
MR. LAPPER-I guess we think that our position, in terms of the
con fig u rat ion 0 f the sit e , i s 1 e g i t i ma t e, and we, per hap s, co u 1 d
come back with a better presentation to prove that, and we
understand that we'd have to sway five members, and we understand
where you're coming from.
MR. TURNER-What do you want to do, gentlemen? Tony, do you want to
let them come back next week, or what?
MR. MARESCO-I don't think it's going to make any difference. What
else can they possibly say?
MR. TURNER-I know Dave's got some concerns.
MR. MENTER-Yes.
I would just as soon do that.
MR. TURNER-Bob?
MR. KARPELES-No, I'd just as soon get it over with.
,
MR. TURNER-Yes. Fred?
MR. CARVIN-I don't think, I'm familiar with that intersection. I
don't think there's anything new that could be presented that would
necessarily sway me.
MR. TURNER-No.
long enough.
Okay, motion's in order.
We've talked about it
MOTION TO DENY SIGN VARIANCE NO. 30-1994 ILIAD LTD. D/B/A
BRUEGGER'S BAGEL BAKERY, Introduced by Fred Carvin who moved for
its adoption, seconded by Linda Hauser:
The applicant is seeking relief from Section 140-6 of the Sign
Ordinance, which allows one wall sign of up to 100 square feet,
with the applicant proposing an additional logo sign. It is felt
that the applicant has not demonstrated that there is a major
- 30 -
--
~
visibility problem from the Route 9 and 254 intersections that
would be eliminated by the placement of a second logo sign. It is
also felt that there are other alternatives to accomplish the same
results without a variance, and that by granting this variance,
that it would not be minimum relief to accomplish the objective.
Duly adopted this 15th day of June, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Miss Hauser, Mr. Maresco,
Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSTAINED: Mr. Menter
ABSENT: Mr. Thomas
MR. LAPPER-Thanks for your consideration.
MR. TURNER-Thank you.
MR. NEIL-Thank you for your time and patience.
MR. TURNER-Thank you.
AREA VARIANCE NO. 31--1994 TYPE II HC-IA JAMES E. VALENTI OWNER:
JAMES & MICHAEL VALENTI WEST SIDE OF ROUTE 9 APPLICANT PROPOSES
TO CONSTRUCT A 3,120 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION AT THE REAR OF A PRE--
EXISTING NONCONFORMING COMMERCIAL BUILDING. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO
EXTEND THE LINE OF THE EXISTING BUILDING, SEEKS RELIEF FROM SECTION
179-23C, WHICH REQUIRES A SIDE YARD SETBACK OF TWENTY (20) FEET/
(WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) 6/8/94 TAX MAP NO. 73-1-6 LOT SIZE:
2.38 ACRES SECTION 179-23 C
BEN PRATT, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 31--1994, James E. Valenti,
Meeting Date: June 15, 1994 "APPLICANT: James E. Valenti
PROJECT LOCATION: west side of Route 9 PROPOSED ACTION:
Applicant proposes to construct a 3,120 square foot addition at the
rear of a pre-existing nonconforming commercial building. REASON
FOR VARIANCE REQUEST, AND BENEFIT TO APPLICANT: The appl icant
needs the additional space, and would like to utilize the existing
building configuration. FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES: The building could
probably be redesigned to conform, but would end up taking up more
of the space needed for parking and retail areas. IS THIS RELIEF
SUBSTANTIAL?: It does not appear this is a substantial amount of
reI i e f . EFFECT ON THE NE I GHBORHOOD OR COMMUN I TY: I t does no t
appear there would be any adverse effects on the neighborhood. No
public comment has been received. IS THIS DIFFICULTY SELF-
CREATED?: This is a pre-·existing, nonconforming structure, so the
difficulty is not self-created. PARCEL HISTORY: The current
owner/applicant purchased the property on August 23, 1993. The
building was constructed in 1975. STAFF COMMENTS AND CONCERNS:
This project will also be subject to site plan review. SEQR: This
is a Type I I action, so no further action is required of the
Board."
MISS HAUSER···On June 8th, 1994, the Warren County Planning Board
recOlmnended that this Area Variance be approved.
MR. TURNER-Okay.
MR. PRATT-Good evening, folks. My name is Ben Pratt. I'm wi th
Miller, Mannix, & Pratt in Glens Falls, and we represent the
applicant. I think the application generally speaks for itself and
sets forth what we wish to do here. The Valenti brothers have
operated the Agway for some period of time and purchased it last
31
'-
~'
August. They wish to expand their warehouse and retail space to a
certain extent, and propose to add 3,000 square feet approximately
at the rear of the existing structure. The space will be used
primarily, as I said, for additional retail and additional
warehouse space.
MR. TURNER-What's the percentage?
MR. PRATT-The entire area, when completed, will
feet. The existing is 5,000. So, basically,
percent of the existing.
be 8,000 squar e
we're adding 60
MR. TURNER-I know, but what's the percentage, retail versus
storage, of the new addition?
JAMES VALENTI
MR. VALENTI-Jim Valenti.
It would be 1400 square feet storage.
MR. PRATT-Fourteen hundred square feet storage, and the rest
retail.
MR. TURNER-Are you going to maneuver the tractor trailers in back
to get in there? Is that the plan?
MR. PRATT-The plan remains to continue to off load most of the
stuff in front and fork lift it into the back.
MR. TURNER-Okay.
MR. MENTER-The access in the back is all down the left side as you
face the building, right?
MR. PRATT-That's not going to be true. As a matter of fact, one of
the reasons in doing this, or as part of the process of doing this,
is to create additional parking out in back, for both the retail
and the garden facilities, and, therefore, we are going to create
a traffic lane along the north side of the building, on the right
hand side of the building, to go feed that traffic in the back. So
that there will be a space, as you can see from the drawing, on the
north side of the building for traffic to move to the back and
park.
MR. CARVIN-Will the storage buildings be moved?
MR. PRATT-Yes.
MR. CARVIN-Both of them?
MR. PRATT-The first storage building is coming right down, and will
be unnecessary, when the warehouse exists.
MR. TURNER-The one identified as Number Two is coming down, right,
the front storage building?
MR. PRATT-Yes. The front storage building is coming down. The
second storage building, which is identified as Number Three, is
going to be moved to the rear of the property.
MR. TURNER-Okay.
MR. PRATT-And that macadam is going to be expanded slightly along
the north end, the north side of the building.
MR. TURNER-Have you had any conversation with Mr. Komarnycky, your
neighbor to the south?
MR. PRATT-None.
MR. TURNER-He hasn't responded? Did you approach him or anything?
- 32-
---/
.----
MR. VALENTI-No, I don't see the gentleman too often.
MR. TURNER-Okay.
MR. KARPELES-I've got a question. You say there are no feasible
alternatives to this variance. As stated above, indenting the
addition to achieve compliance with the setback requirements would
complicate the construction process and would therefore result in
significant additional expense for the applicant. It would seem to
me that that's pretty straightforward, that you could just put a
six foot jog in there, and move the whole building over, and it
wouldn't complicate the construction at all.
MR. PRATT-Well, what it does, it does two things. The first thing
it does is take useable space to the north or to the west if we
expanded the bu il ding, away from what we have now. The second
thing it does is.
MR. KARPELES-Yes, but you could do that. Everybody could say, lets
do that. Lets eliminate the setback and I'll get more space.
MR. PRATT-The second thing is that, to make the building
aesthetically acceptable, as well as easier to construct, it is
important, we have been advised, to maintain that roof line, if we
can, and the b u i 1 din g, asp r 0 p 0 sed, w 0 u 1 d ma i n t a i nth e ex i s tin g
roof line of the existing building, so that there would not be
either a decrease or an offset or a setback with respect to the
roof line, and that's the construction issue.
MR. KARPELES-Have you got any figures on cost, how much it would
increase the cost, if you did?
MR. PRATT-We do not.
MR. KARPELES-So you haven't really investigated that.
MR. PRATT-We've talked about it, and that's it. We've not actually
asked for an itemized difference, or an estimate of doing it either
way.
MR. TURNER-Mr. Valenti, I didn't look at the roof, but what is it?
Is it a pitched roof, a flat roof, or what?
MR. VALENTI-It's a pitched roof.
It's about a four, twelve pitch.
MR. TURNER-Four, twelve. Okay, and the ridge goes east and west,
right?
MR. VALENTI-Yes.
MR. MENTER-Are you going to have a retail entrance in the back?
MR. VALENTI-The storage building is going to be in the back.
MR. MENTER-Well, additional parking spaces would suggest that that
was for customers.
MR. VALENTI-There is going to be parking in the back for customers.
There is not planned to be, at this point, a retail entrance in the
back. A good majority of the customers, when there are, during the
periods of time when there is going to be a need for parking in the
back, or people who are going to want to visit the greenhouses and
the external material for the most part.
MR. MENTER-Because I see the parking as a big issue, because you
have a parking problem there.
MR. VALENTI-For a month, the month of May, that's a difficult place
to park. The rest of the year, it really is not.
33 --
,~
--,'
MR. TURNER-Are we going to have a separation wall in the proposed
addition between the existing building back wall, and the retail
space that you're going to add on? You know the wall in the back
of the building you've got now, right?
MR. VALENTI-Yes.
MR. TURNER-And then you re going to move back 1400 square feet,
right, for your retail. You're going to put another wall between
there and the storage?
MR. VALENTI-Exactly.
MR. TURNER-So there'll be nobody, you know, wandering out into the
storage area.
MR. VALENTI-No.
MR. TURNER-The retail area will be reserved, right? So that leaves
you about 1720 square feet of storage.
MR. MARESCO-So you won't have any trailers going back there at all
now, to unload?
MR. VALENTI-We never had any trailers go back. All of our trailers
will be pulled up along the south side of the building, along that
entranceway, where we take the load off.
MR. MARESCO-And then you just fork lift everything?
MR. VALENTI-Exactly.
MR. TURNER-So anything that will go in the storage area will go
down the south side of the building into the storage area, right?
MR. VALENTI-Down the south side.
MR. TURNER-Yes, and will be migrating around in front where the
retail business is, for safety reasons. You won't take the fork
lift truck and go around the building to the north side, will you?
MR. VALENTI-No. We go right down the south side.
MR. TURNER-Anyone else? Okay.
then.
I'll now open the public hearing,
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. TURNER-Any discussion?
violating the setback.
know, Bob, you're concerned wi th
MR. KARPELES-I don't really think it's the minimum variance. They
haven't proved to me "that they can't, it's going to cost them any
additional money in order to move that over six feet.
MR. TURNER-Anyone else?
MR. MENTER-I think there's a benefit to keeping it in line with the
existing building and utilizing that north side to funnel some
traffic back there, because it is dangerous. Maybe May is when I
go there, but, boy, that parking lot's a zoo, you know.
MR. TURNER-Yes, it is. You better keep your eyes open or you'll
get run over in a hurry. I don't have a problem with it. The only
problem 1 would have had with it, Bob, is if Mr. Komarnycky had a
problem with it violating his side setback, and I think in order to
- 34 -
J
'--
keep the integrity of the roof line, I think it's better to keep it
in line with the rest of the building. It means moving it over,
putting another wall up there, and then moving your center ridge
over six feet.
MR. KARPELES-I'm just one person.
MR. TURNER-Okay. Motion's in order.
MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 31-1994 JAMES E. VALENTI,
Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Linda Hauser:
James E. and Michael Valenti, doing business as Agway of Glens
Falls. This would grant the applicant relief on the south property
line for the new proposed addition of 5.2 feet from the 20 foot
side setback. The setback now being 14 foot 8 inches. Yes, the
building could probably be moved six feet to the north, but it's
fairly impractical. There's no public opposition. Mr. Komarnycky,
who owns the property to the south, evidently has no concern. By
granting the relief, it would maintain the roof line for the
principal building and the proposed addition. There is no adverse
effect on the neighborhood, no public comment. This is a
preexisting nonconforming structure. This is the minimum relief to
alleviate the specified practical difficulty.
Duly adopted this 15th day of June, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Maresco, Mr. Menter, Mr. Carvin, Miss Hauser,
Mr. Turner
NOES: Mr. Karpeles
ABSENT: Mr. Thomas
OLD BUSINESS:
USE VARIANCE NO. 106-1993 TYPE: UNLISTED WR-IA JOHN C. &.
CHRISTINE BERGERON OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE NACY ROAD, GLEN LAKE
APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REACTIVATE A PRE-EXISTING INACTIVE RESTAURANT
BUILDING AS A RESTAURANT. PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED WATERFRONT
RESIDENTIAL, WHERE RESTAURANT IS NOT AN ALLOWED USE. APPLICANT IS
SEEKING RELIEF FROM SECTION 179-16D, USES PERMITTED IN WATERFRONT
RESIDENTIAL ZONES. (BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE) 4/11/94 (WARREN
COUNTY PLANNING) 12/8/93 TAX MAP NO. 44-1-12, 5.1 LOT SIZE: 200
FT. BY 85 FT. SECTION 179-16D
MR. TURNER-We have a letter.
MISS HAUSER-Okay. This is from the office of Kenneally &
Tarantino, "ATTENTION: Jim Martin & Sue Cipperly Re: Application
of John C. & Christine Bergeron Dear Jim & Sue: As indicated last
week, the Applicant was considering not proceeding at the June 15,
1994 Zoning Board of Appeals Hearing. That fact was confirmed on
this date with the General Counsel of the Applicant (J. Robert
LaPann, Esq.). We do respectfully request that the matter be
tabled again and set over to a date in July 1994. This request is
based in part upon the Trial Schedule of the undersigned who will
be appearing in a Supreme Court Trial in Ulster County, NY on
Wednesday, June 15,1994 and Thursday, June 16, 1994. Thank you
for your continuing cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours,
KENNEALLY & TARANTINO Dennis J. Tarantino Signed in Absence"
MR. TURNER-Before we respond to that, did you advertise that
application again?
MS. CIPPERLY-We did re-advertise.
notices.
We didn't send out 500 foot
MR. TURNER-You didn't?
35 -
MS. CIPPERLY-We did not. Mr. Bergeron also brought us another,
additional check for advertising, because it's been advertised a
few times, now.
MR. TURNER-All right. would suggest that if this comes to
fruition, the next time around, that you send out the 500 foot
notices, because it's been a while since the people were here, and
they might want to get noticed.
MR. CARVIN-I think if it doesn't come up in July, then this thing
goes down. It's getting real old.
MS. CIPPERLY-Yes. Sort of, our position on it is that, or mine at
least, as the person that kind of has to keep track of this, is
that it's getting, it's been difficult to keep everybody notified
or have some kind of judgement about, it crossed my mind that maybe
i two u 1 d be bet t e r to h a vet h em wit h d raw it, and w hen the y , r e
completely ready, to come, because otherwise, we keep telling
people it's going to be on, and then we have to call them back when
we get a fax the day before the meeting.
MR. TURNER-I think we discussed that the last time, didn't we?
MR. CARVIN-Yes. I think, at this point, Ted, isn't there a Town
action, don't we have an enforcement action going?
MS. CIPPERLY-Yes.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. CARVIN-What's the status of that? Do you know, right off hand?
MS. CIPPERLY-I believe the Attorney is writing up an enforcement
action. Jim Martin had sent them a letter saying that he's going
to be expecting them to follow through on the '76 Site Plan, and
the Attorney is writing up something formal.
MR. MENTER-So nothing formal's been really sent to them.
MS. CIPPERLY-No.
MR. MENTER-He hasn't responded in any way.
MR. TURNER-They haven't been notified of any court action, yet,
right?
MS. CIPPERLY-Betty, do you know any more about that?
BETTY MONAHAN
MRS. MONAHAN-Jim told me today that he has prepared the summons,
from his angle, and taken it up to Paul Dusek's office, and he
asked me to check for Paul, when Paul could get that on his
schedule, and Paul said that the work load he has, he probably will
not be able to get that done until the middle of July.
MR. TURNER-All right. Well, you know, if they came with it, and
the Board felt happy that they couldn't realize a reasonable return
on the property and we approved it, we could hang it on that.
MR. CARVIN-Well, I guess illY problem with the extension is that I
don't know what's going on? What is the reason for another
extension, just because the guy's in court?
MR. TURNER-Yes, because he's in court.
MR. CARVIN-I mean, is there any progress?
MS. CIPPERLY-There was, Mr. Tarantino did call earlier this week,
and asked whether, apparently there is no definite buyer that has
- 36 -
'-'
-/'
signed a contract, and he was wondering if it would be better to
put this off until a definite buyer could come and also present,
and he was advised that it really doesn't matter who the buyer is.
It's a variance that goes with the land, and even if you had a
buyer who said they were going to do a nice restaurant, that
doesn't guarantee anything, that they should con1e and address the
Use Variance.
MR. MENTER-Well, actually, that's, technically, accurate, but it's
not accurate, I don't think, in terms of the way the original
meeting was left. It seems to me that there was some discussion
about who was going to be in there.
MS. CIPPERLY-There was discussion of that, but he was also supposed
to try to market it as residential.
MR. TURNER-He was supposed to market it as residential and
corrunercial, and he was also supposed to bring the gentleman that he
was.
MR. MENTER-Okay. These were all issues.
MR. TURNER-To buy the building, and because the Board wanted to
talk to him because once Mr. Bergeron divested himself of the piece
of property, then we were stuck with the gentleman that was going
to buy it.
MS. CIPPERLY-So, apparently, the person that they thought they had
in hand at that time has not really been firmly corrunitted.
MR. MENTER-Well, actually, that was all secondary to the marketing
of the property and providing some concrete evidence that there was
a financial problem.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MS. CIPPERLY-And in driving by there this week, I noticed that the
signs, they have switched realtors, that the signs that are up
there say corrunercial. On the parcel there are signs that say, it's
being marketed by Levack/Burke, and they say commercial.
MR. TURNER-Okay. So what's your pleasure? Do you want to grant
them the, table it until July, and then deal with it after that?
MR. CARVIN-You have no idea what the July schedule looks like, at
this point.
MS. CIPPERLY-We don't have, I think we one In so far, but it's only
the middle of the month.
MR . CAR V 1 N - P 1 usa 11 the tab 1 e san d eve r y t h i n g, rig h t ?
have a bunch of them?
Don't we
MS. CIPPERLY-You tabled one tonight. It's not, you know, an
overwhelming work load, right at the moment.
MR. CARVIN-Okay.
MR. TURNER-I'd say, give it to them one more time, in fairness to
the lawyer being in court, because he can't be here, and if that
doesn't come about, then.
MR. CARVIN-Well, suppose they change lawyers again, 1 guess, is my
only problem.
MR. TURNER-No. I don't think they're going to change this time.
He changed the last time because I don't think Bob LaPann wanted to
address the issue.
MR. CARVIN-Well,
think it's very, very important that we notify
- 37 --
'-
the neighbors, because of the neighborhood opposition.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
MR. CARVIN-So I guess, if we're going to do it in July, we're going
to do it in July.
MS. CIPPERLY--We have been, I think we notified them all, once, and
then again, and we have been in contact with, I believe, somebody
from the Glen Lake Association that agreed to be kind of a contact
person at the time. So every time it gets put on, we notify them,
and every time it gets taken off, we notify them.
MISS HAUSER-I don't think we're going to be able to make a decision
unless they have a specific buyer, because all of the neighbors
that were here were concerned about who, exactly, was going to go
into that building and what they were going to do with the
property. So even if we speak with them in July, and they have no
buyer, we're going to be in the same place where we are right now,
or where we were the last time we talked about it.
MR. MENTER-Well, actually, it hinges just as much or more on what
becomes of the real estate market.
MR. TURNER-Yes.
Okay.
Okay.
Do you want to extend it for one month?
MOTION TO GRANT FINAL EXTENSION OF USE VARIANCE NO. 106-1993 JOHN
C. & CHRISTINE BERGERON, Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved
for its adoption, seconded by Fred Carvin:
That the people within 500 feet be notified when the application
comes up in July. Re-advertise the application, at the applicant's
expense.
Duly adopted this 15th day of June, 1994, by the following vote:
MR. CARVIN-Is it the applicant's responsibility to pay for that, or
is this something that the Town has to pick up?
MR. TURNER-It's just a matter of sending an envelope out with a
letter and the name of the project on it, Variance Number and so
forth.
MS. CIPPERLY-We'll have to figure out, he just did give us an
additional fee. We'll have to see what, that's supposed to cover
the advertising and we'll just have to see where that stands, as
far as, within the Department. If it's going to cost a lot more,
we'll have to ask him for more.
MR. TURNER-All right.
MR. CARVIN-So we're going to re-advertise the whole thing.
MR. TURNER-No. I don't know. Do you want to re-advertise it, or
do you want to just send the notice out?
MS. CIPPERLY-I think it should be re-advertised.
MR. CARVIN-I agree.
MR. TURNER-All right. Okay.
AYES: Mr. Maresco, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin,
Mr. Turner
NOES: Miss Hauser
ABSENT: Mr. Thomas
- 38 -
-./
---
REQUEST FOR EXTENS ION OF APPROVAL: AREA VARIANCE NO. 29-1993
JANET HUSTON BELL, WEST SIDE OF RIDGE ROAD, NEXT TO MEAD'S NURSERY,
TAX MAP NO. 59-5-12 IN A HC-1A ZONE. EXPAND EXISTING PROFESSIONAL
BUILDING WHICH WILL INCLUDE AN APARTMENT ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE
EXPANSION. SEEKS 35 FEET RELIEF FROM SECTION 179-28 WHICH REQUIRES
A SEVENTY-FIVE (75) FOOT SETBACK FROM THE ROAD IN THE TRAVEL
CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE. APPROVED JUNE 16, 1993.
MR. TURNER-We have a letter from Daniel W. Bell, in relation to a
variance we granted.
MISS HAUSER-Okay. It says, "Dear Mr. Turner: would like to
request a renewal for Area Variance No. 29-1993. I had planned on
adding to my office space as I had hired another doctor and felt
the need for more treatment rooms. Since that time plans have
changed. My new associate will be leaving my employment and
therefore we will not need the extra rooms right now. However, I
would like a renewal on the Area Variance so that if I hire another
associate in the future I may go ahead with my plans to build.
Sincerely, Daniel W. Bell, D.C." And it was dated June 7th, 1994.
MR. TURNER-Any comment on that?
MR. CARVIN-It seems to me, as I remember it, wasn't there something
about an apartment, or two apartments in there?
MR. TURNER-Yes, an apartment, in the back. Yes.
MR. CARVIN-I honestly don't remember how that was resolved.
MR. KARPELES-I abstained on that.
came on the Board.
It must have been when I first
MR. CARVIN-Yes, it may have been. Unfortunately, myself, Mr.
Thomas and Mr. Turner were the only ones that were there.
MISS HAUSER--Bob and I were new then. We abstained.
MS. CIPPERLY-I did look up the original Variance, and the actual
Variance was in Mrs Bell's name.
MR. TURNER-Right.
MS. C I PPERL Y -And
approved by the
allowed.
everything
Board. So
they asked for, as I recall,
if there were apartments, it
was
was
MR. TURNER--This went to the Planning
approved the extension, until June 30th,
Board
1995.
last
week.
They
MR. CARVIN-Yes, I saw it in the minutes there.
MR. KARPELES-Aren't you kind of writing the guy a blank check to
have this go on forever?
MR. TURNER-No, one year.
MR. KARPELES-Yes, but he already had a year, right?
MR. TURNER-Yes, well, he had a year, Bob, but the guy that he was
going to build it for left the practice, and so he didn't see the
need to build the addition. So now he wants the extension granted
for one year, and grant it until June of next year, June 30th, and
if he gets another associate, then he can go ahead with it.
Otherwise, he's got to come back.
MR. CARVIN-Well, it might be just as wise to have him come back to
re-visit it because we've got a new Board.
MR. KARPELES-Yes.
It's a whole new Board.
-- 39-
-
MR. TURNER-Okay. That's up to you guys. I don't have any argument
with that. All right, do you want to make a motion?
MOTION TO DENY EXTENSION OF AREA VARIANCE NO. 29-1993 JANET HUSTON
BELL, Introduced by Fred Carvin who moved for its adoption,
seconded by David Menter:
Due to the fact that there has been a substantial change in the
nature and plans of the applicant, with no specific indication of
when these plans may be re-instituted. This does not preclude the
applicant resubmitting the application when his motives and intent
becomes clearer.
Duly adopted this 15th day of June, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Miss Hauser,
Mr. Maresco, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Thomas
MR. TURNER-We have one more letter.
MISS HAUSER-Okay. There's a letter dated June 8th, 1994, from Elan
Cherney, Esq., to the Zoning Board of Appeals, Regarding Use
Variance 23-1994 "Dear Sir or Madame: As attorney for Charles and
Barbara Seeley, we are hereby requesting that their application be
withdrawn without prejudice. Unless we hear to the contrary in the
next several days, we will assume that the application has been so
withdrawn. Thank you for your time and cooperation. Sincerely,
Elan Y. Cherney, Esq."
MR. TURNER-Do you know what they're going to do?
MR. CARVIN-I think there's an awful lot of questions that have been
raised, Mr. Turner, for us to just walk away from this. So I'd
like some real clarification as to what this Board intends to do
with some of these issues.
MR. MENTER-What type of issues?
MR. TURNER-What would happen now if they withdraw it would be they
would get a summons from the Town they're in violation of the
Ordinance. The Town would take them to court. It would probably
go to Justice Court, and the issue might be decided there, and it
might not be. They're in total violation of the Ordinance, because
I have it from a good source that their so called line that went
through their property never did go through their property, from a
surveyor.
MR. CARVIN-Well, I'd like to point out that we've had at least one
legal action that the Town instituted, and then failed to follow
through on.
MR. TURNER-They failed to follow through on it because of that
line, that deviation in that line.
MS. CIPPERLY-The other information, aside from that line issue,
which I don't think Ted and I will ever agree on, that line issue
still, we'll take Leon's word for that, but the garage that they've
been operating out of, they had a building permit for in 1979. I
sent you that information, Certificate of Occupancy wasn't issued
un t ill 9 8 4, I be 1 i eve i t was , and i t was, 1 i k e, c omm ere i a 11 y . So ,
apparently the advice of their attorney, who was Mr. Judge, was to
withdraw the application and make the Town proceed with an
enforcement action. In essence, make the Town prove that they're
there illegally, or whatever.
MR. TURNER-Well, it's my understanding they just had their property
- 40 -
~
............
surveyed by a surveyor, and the line they indicated to us, that cut
through their property, evidently did not cut through their
property.
MS. CIPPERLY-Well, they can present that in court.
MR. TURNER-Yes. That's what I'm saying. The Town can.
MR. KARPELES-Well, who will pursue this now? Will it actually be
pursued?
MR. TURNER-Sure. Jim will have to go after them.
violation of the Ordinance.
They're in
MS. CIPPERLY-The other aspect of this is that they are also looking
at another piece of property elsewhere in Town.
MR. TURNER-That's fine, but they've been saying that for two or
three years, and they still stay there.
MS. CIPPERLY-So, I think one of the things they're trying to prove
is that if they did ever try to sell their property, is it purely
residential, or could it also have a Light Industrial aspect to it.
Eve n i f ~ we r en' t the r e , co u 1 d the y ma r k e tit as L i g h t
Industrial at all. So they're trying to get that straightened out,
but as it stands now, the Town, to our knowledge, there's no legal
use happening there.
MR. TURNER-Right. Aren't they in violation, as far as the so
called garage that they got an occupancy permit for, for antique
cars? Aren't they in violation by going ahead and moving the
machine shop over there and operating a machine shop out of the
garage they got an occupancy for, for antique cars?
MS. CIPPERLY-We' 11 see what the attorney does with all this, and as
you said, it has been to court once before, and it was backed off
from because of that line business.
MR. CARVIN-Yes, and that was back, what, 1987, and here it is 1994,
and we still have the same situation. I mean, what is a reasonable
length of time on this?
MR. MENTER--See, the problem is, though, really none of this is
within our scope. Am I right? I mean, once he's withdrawn, it's
certainly not within this Board's scope to (lost word).
MR. CARVIN-Yes, but I think it's within the scope of this Board to
institute the action, isn't it?
MR. TURNER-No, the Town has to serve them with a summons in
violation, and then they take it to court from there.
MR. CARVIN-Okay, but is there any indication that the Town will do
that?
MS. CIPPERLY-Yes.
MR. TURNER-Yes, they are.
MS. CIPPERLY-But we just, this letter, whatever the date is on it,
was just received this month. That's what their new tact was going
to be.
MR. TURNER-He's been there for so long because the Town failed to
take the action they should have taken 20 years ago. Because he
bought it as a residence, period, and he just moved his operation
right in there, and he just thumbed his nose at everybody. Have we
got anything else? Minutes. Do you want to do the minutes?
MR. CARVIN-Yes.
- '1/-'
CORRECTION OF MINUTES
March 16, 1994: NONE
MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MARCH 16TH. 1994, Introduced by
Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Linda
Hauser:
Duly adopted this 15th day of June, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Miss Hauser,
Mr. Maresco, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Thomas
March 17th, 1994: NONE
MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MARCH 17TH. 1994, Introduced by
Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Linda
Hauser:
Duly adopted this 15th day of June, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Carvin, Miss Hauser, Mr. Maresco,
Mr. Menter, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Thomas
March 23rd, 1994: Page 8, second Mr. Thomas, what about the
stormwater coming off that. How do you plan to, sib get rid of it;
Page 8, Mr. Maresco, what kind of traffic is going to be generated,
do they figure will sib deleted; Page 11, first sentence, Taco Bell
right across the street, I assume that we are sib not, going to
have two Taco Bells right across from each other; Page 11, Mr.
Carvin, now is being sought here, or can we narrow this right down
to Taco Bell, omit the words would this; Page 21, Mr. Turner, now,
it' sarna j 0 r i t y , I k now it, sib is, not i s n ' t ; D i s c u s s ion
commencing with Mr. Carvin, on bottom, I mean, now that Paul is
here, there was a question, at least in my mind, are we moving on,
or is this an open discussion at this point, and Mr. Turner
indicated open discussion, but sib, all discussion with regards to
the Seeleys, off the record;
MR. CARVIN-Because we went into Executive Session shortly
thereafter, and it is my understanding that to have an extensive
discussion like this, without the applicant's, I think that should
all be off the record. I'm asking for an opinion on that. I would
eliminate the bottom of 21, 22, 23,24, 25, and go into the motion
to go into Executive Discussion discussing matters. I think that
all is irrelevant, and I think it should be off the record.
MR. TURNER-Yes, I agree. You're right.
MR. CARVIN-So I would move the minutes with those corrections.
MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MARCH 23RD. 1994 AS CORRECTED,
Introduced by Fred Carvin who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Theodore Turner:
Duly adopted this 15th day of June, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Carvin, Miss Hauser, Mr. Maresco, Mr. Menter, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSTAINED: Mr. Karpeles
- 42 -
,--",,"
"'-
ABSENT: Mr. Thomas
April 20th, 1994: Page 17, middle of the page, Mr. Turner, just
below Mr. O'Donnell, where Mr. O'Donnell said it varies, next Mr.
Turner, sib it's deep enough to get any motor craft in there.,
delete, they've got cabin cruisers right there; Page 17, second Mr.
Turner down from there sib, I know, but it's less obtrusive; Page
39, where Mr. Bovair states, when you purchase a certificate
through Woodmen, you actually own part of Woodmen. Part of the
lodge building will be yours;
MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF APRIL 20TH. 1994 AS CORRECTED,
Introduced by Fred Carvin who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Anthony Maresco:
Duly adopted this 15th day of June, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Maresco, Mr. Menter, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSTAINED: Mr. Karpeles, Miss Hauser
ABSENT: Mr. Thomas
April 21st, 1994: Page 11, middle of the page, Mr. Carvin, I tell
you I've come down there in the mornings, and they try to back
these trucks in here, and it just ties, sib traffic up, take out,
that, I mean it's a bad road to begin with;
MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF APRIL 21ST. 1994 AS CORRECTED,
Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Fred Carvin:
Duly adopted this 15th day of June, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Menter, Mr. Carvin, Mr. Maresco, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSTAINED: Mr. Karpeles, Miss Hauser
ABSENT: Mr. Thomas
April 27th, 1994: NONE
MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF APRIL 27TH. 1994, Introduced by
Theodor e Tur ner who moved for its adop t ion, seconded by Fred
Carvin:
Duly adopted this 15th day of June, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Carvin, Miss Hauser, Mr. Maresco, Mr. Menter, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSTAINED: Mr. Karpeles
ABSENT: Mr. Thomas
On motion meeting was adjourned.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Theodore Turner, Chairman
-- 43 -