Loading...
1996-10-16 ~ ::;OH1GINAL QUEENS BURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 16, 1996 INDEX Use Variance No. 70-1996 Tax Map No. 63-1-2 Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. 1. Area Variance No. 98-1996 Tax Map No. 117-5-4.3 James Hill, Jr. 7. Area Variance No. 97-1996 Tax Map No. 83-1-5.1 Fern C. Hall 14. Sign Variance No. 86-1996 Tax Map No. 54-5-11.2 Carolyn and Robert Rudolph 26. Area Variance No. 91-1996 Tax Map No. 130-1-9, 10 Peter and Connie Fish 32. Area Variance No. 88-1996 Tax Map No. 19-1-18 Torren L. Moore 36. Use Variance No. 94-1996 Tax Map No. 147-1-1.1, 1.2 James C. Kislowski 47. Use Variance No. 93-1996 Lorraine Jude Spero 76. 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 ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) QUEENS BURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 16, 1996 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT CHRIS THOMAS, CHAIRMAN BONNIE LAPHAM, SECRETARY DAVID MENTER WILLIAM GREEN DONALD 0' LEARY LOUIS STONE ROBERT KARPELES CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER-JOHN GORALSKI STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. THOMAS-The first thing we have to do tonight is appoint, elect or find a Vice Chair, since I cannot be sitting on the first application. Do we have any nominations for Vice Chairperson? MR. KARPELES-I'll nominate Bill Green. MR. THOMAS-Do I have a second? MR. MENTER-I'll second. MR. THOMAS-All in favor, raise your hand. One, two, three, four five. Opposed? You want it, Bill? MR. GREEN-I guess so. MR. THOMAS-You've got it, Mister. Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation. an employee of the Corporation. So you've got the first one, for I have to bow out because I am OLD BUSINESS: USE VARIANCE NO. 70-1996 TYPE: UNLISTED SFR-1~ NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP. OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE WEST SIDE OF COUNTRY CLUB ROAD, JUST SOUTH OF THE WARREN COUNTY BIKEWAY APPLICANT PROPOSES CONSTRUCTION OF A STORAGE BUILDING AT THE QUEENS BURY ELECTRIC SUBSTATION ON COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. THIS PROPOSED USE DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE USES ALLOWED IN THE SFR-1A ZONE. RELIEF IS BEING REQUESTED FROM THE USES ALLOWED IN SECTION 179-20. WARREN COUNTY PLANNING 8/21/96 TAX MAP NO. 63-1-2 LOT SIZE: 9.94 ACRES SECTION 179-20 JOE KRYZAK, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MRS. LAPHAM-Okay. On a meeting date on August 28, 1996, Variance File No. 70-1996 was tabled. "MOTION TO TABLE USE VARIANCE NO. 70- 1996 NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP., Introduced by Fred Carvin who moved for its adoption, seconded by Bonnie Lapham: Pending the request of additional information from the applicant. Duly adopted this 28th day of August, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. O'Leary, Mrs. Lapham, Mr. Carvin NOES: NONE ABSTAINED: Mr. Thomas - 1 - {Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96} ABSENT: Mr. Green Sincerely, Fred A. Carvin, Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals" STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Use Variance No. 70-1996, Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., Meeting Date: October 16, 1996 "APPLICANT: Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation PROJECT LOCATION: Country Club Rd. PROPOSED PROJECT AND CONFORMANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE: The applicant proposes to construct a storage building at the existing Queensbury electric substation on Country Club Rd. The proposed expansion of this nonconforming use does not conform to the allowed uses in the SFR- 1A district. Relief is being requested from the uses in Section 179-20. REVIEW CRITERIA It has been determined that the review criteria that applies to this application is the 'relaxed criteria' used in variances for public utilities. Under this criteria, a utility must show that the use at the proposed location is necessary in order to provide safe and adequate service and that there are more compelling reasons which make a proposed site more feasible than others. Using this criteria for public utilities, the previous criteria contained in staff comments dated August 28, 1996 would not apply to this particular application. SEQR: Unlisted, short form EAF required. II MR. GREEN-Is the applicant here? Is there anything you'd like to add at this point? MR. KRYZAK-We were asked to provide additional information, the last time we were here, regarding the proposed storage building, such as a list of materials, various areas within the region, a list of other properties we considered, to make some additions to the drawing and address the traffic information. I have provided a project narrative. Did you all receive that? MR. KARPELES-No, I don't think so. MR. MENTER-No. MR. KARPELES-I don't think we got it. MR. KRYZAK-I brought that up to George Hilton. MR. KARPELES-Since the last time, you mean? MR. KRYZAK-Yes. MR, GORALSKI-I don't see it in the file George gave me. MR. GREEN-Well, maybe you can go through it, and maybe summarize it for us a little bit. MR. KRYZAK- Yes. Basically what it is is the proposed storage building is to be located at the Queensbury Electric Substation on Country Club Road. It will provide storage for parts and equipment available exclusively to five substation crews headquartered at Niagara Mohawk's Quaker Road facility. These crews are responsible for the construction, operation and maintenance of electric substations within the Northeast region, which extends from Saratoga to Fort Henry. The proposed building will be used to store critical spare parts and parts in limited quantities, seasonal equipment, tools and miscellaneous materials referenced in the attached list which are necessary for the optimal operation and maintenance of electric substations in this region. Many of the - 2 - ~ (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) parts are dated and no longer being manufactured, thus requiring an inventory of these parts to be readily available for use. There is also a limited number of long lead time items that would be stored here in the event of an emergency. This building would also allow for the consolidation of substation materials and equipment that are being stored at Sherman Island Hydro. Sherman Island Hydro is presently the primary storage location and will soon no longer be available for use, compounding the need for the proposed storage building. This building will also allow for inside storage of some materials that are outside and subject to deterioration and reduced reliability. A review of the volume of traffic to Sherman Island for substation purposes showed that between four and six trips per week would be required. This small volume of traffic would have little impact on the overall traffic situation on Country Club Road. In addition, no person will be assigned to this building and equipment and materials will be picked up on an as-needed basis. Site selection for the storage building was based on available existing Niagara Mohawk land that was of sufficient area to accommodate a 80' x 50' building, accessibility, minimal site development, within close proximity to the Quaker Road crew facility and having little adverse effect on the surrounding neighborhood, and I have a table listed in here, and basically we compared approximately nine different sites within the region. Most of the sites were, the area was too small. Other sites were in a residential area and not necessarily fitting in within the neighborhood. There were three sites, ultimately, that we considered. They being the Cedar Substation, located on Queensbury Avenue. It's zoned Single Family Residential. The site is large enough to accommodate a storage building at the size proposed. Setback requirements could be met. It has good access to main highways. The proposed building would be out of character with the adjacent single family dwellings and the site is highly visible with little natural screening. We also looked at Ogdensbrook Station, and that's located on Sherman Road in the Town of Queensbury. Again, that's a single family residential, and there's also 500 feet back from the road, 500 feet and farther back from the road is light industrial, which would require action, again, by the Zoning Board. The site's large enough, again, to accommodate the proposed building. Setback requirements could be met. Building is, again, out of character with the adjacent residential development, and this location would have'~ increased site development costs and security concerns. The Queensbury site on Country Club Road in the Town of Queensbury. The site is large enough to accommodate the storage building. Good access to main highways. Setback requirements could be met. Natural vegetation provides good screening for the building. Of the three sites considered, the Queensbury substation is the preferred site for the proposed storage building. The building would be located between an existing substation and transmission lines in the area that provide good natural screening. Being located on a county road provides good access to main routes. The location does not have a high concentration of single family dwellings even though the area is zoned residential. The general neighborhood characteristics of the adjacent land is that of one vacant residential lot and plaza commercial area containing a warehouse and retail building. The addition of a storage building at this location would have minimal impact on the surrounding areas we feel. We've included a list of typical items stored. Critical spare parts, and these parts would be in limited quantities would be battery chargers operating, mechanism relays, disconnect switches, instrument transformers, insulators, lightening arresters, gauges, pushing, compressors, and circuit breakers. Seasonal equipment would be snowblowers, lawnmowers, shovels, power blades. Test equipment and tools, meger, ground, grid tester, ammeter, voltmeter, fiberglass sticks, voltage detectors, drill saws, vibrator and compactor, and miscellaneous materials and equipment would be OSHA safety requirements, safety equipment, cable conductors, hardware, nuts, bolts, steel pieces. I've included some photographs, basically, of - 3 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) the site, and also there was a question regarding what were certain buildings on the site and certain structures on the site, and we've tried to address that in this picture here. There is, the building in the foreground is the control building, and that encloses the, basically encloses the brains of the substation, (lost words) insider controls, protection equipment to monitor the electrical system and isolate any abnormal conditions detected. There were some questions as to some other small buildings back here which are metal clads, metal clad switch gear enclosures containing multiple circuit breakers and protection equipment. We also, I also have some photos here of the adjacent properties on the west side of Country Club Road, basically showing the vacant land, the warehouse and the retail building. I've included a typical storage building of what basically it would look like, and also a proposed floor plan of basically areas that would be designated for certain types of equipment and materials. There was another question by the Board regarding trailers presently stored at this site, and I believe there was two tractor trailer trailers there. Those would be removed. Those would be removed from the site. MR. GREEN-Those are basically being used for storage now? MR. KRYZAK-No. They've been sitting there for a number of years. They're not in use, and we also have a map up here, basically showing the area, the region, and where our Quaker Road headquarters are located in Glens Falls, and then we were looking for an area, a site within close proximity to minimize the amount of response time that the crews had to go between Quaker Road and a proposed builaìng, and this also shows the entire northeast region that this is serviced by. MR. GREEN-Your list of materials that you went down through there, is there any fuel going to be stored there of any sorts? RICH ALLEN MR. ALLEN-My name is Rich Allen. The only fuel that would be stored there might be fuel in like five gallon gas cans that would be used for snowblowers or lawnmowers, but no large scale storage of any fuel. MR. GREEN-Any sort of chemicals or cleaners or solvents or anything like that? MR. ALLEN-No hazardous materials. You may find some bug sprays in there. You may find isolated spray cans of various solvents that we need, but not of hazardous materials. MR. GREEN-The other question that came to mind, the other two sites that you narrowed it down to, basically, is there any development on those sites? This one already has some buildings on it. Are the other ones basically just transformers, or do they also have some other buildings on them? MR. ALLEN-The Cedar Substation has transformers. It also has a control building located at it, and the Ogdenbrook Substation has a metal plate switch gear as well as transformers. MR. GREEN-Does anybody else have any questions? MR. STONE-The fenced in area that exists now, is well within your own property, which extends quite a distance, does it not, around this? MR. KRYZAK-That's correct. MR. STONE-Your immediate neighbors aren't very immediate? - 4 - -- - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. KRYZAK-Correct. MR. O'LEARY-The three possible locations are all locat~d in the Queensbury area because it's central to the northern regl0n? MR. ALLEN-That's correct. It's central to the areas that the crews have to. MR. O'LEARY-Theoretically you could have looked at any location within the region. MR. ALLEN-Yes, but it didn't meet all the criteria that we needed for service reliability. MR. KARPELES-That other site that's 19 acres, it would seem as though you would farther away from your neighbors on a larger lot than you are on this one. I'm not familiar with that location. What is the real reason why you picked this nine acre lot as opposed to the nineteen acre lot? MR. ALLEN-Ogdenbrook, that's the parcel that was split zoned residential and light industrial. The back portion of that lot, light industrial, or actually most of that portion of that lot has a lot of dumping, a lot of access by kids and motor bikes, and not only would there be higher development costs due to the amount of clearing of the trees of that lot, but also we have concerns of the security of a building set back off the road, particularly not seen because of current problems we are experiencing at that site. MR. MENTER-What about the location on this site? It seems like it's, even though it's 64 feet from the road, it's very close to the road right there, and it's a fairly substantial building. It seems like there's a better location somewhere there, on the site, where it might be set back a little bit less visible, and not that readily visible from the road. You've got a big piece of property there. MR. ALLEN-One of the problems, we had an environmental assessment done of that site, and along, I guess it would be the north and the western side, we have wetlands, okay. So that's undevelopable. We also have the. transmission lines coming in, whit:h we require a certain distance from those lines in order for the building, to prevent any type of static build up from the lines. Our intention in locating it there in that spot was trying to utilize as much as we can of the existing yard, and then developing as little, if you could, of the unused portion of the lot, while maintaining as much of the screening as we can. We've got some screening down along the southern side. We have quite a few tree rows, and we'd like to keep those to help screen the building from passers-by. MR. MENTER-Is this a typical structure in this region? I mean, not in this immediate district, because it's obviously being built to serve a purpose that isn't being served right now, but are other areas, I forget the term you used, this serves five. MR. ALLEN-It was five crews. MR. MENTER-Five crews. Are there other areas where this type of structure exists that serves other crews? MR. ALLEN-We have crews located also in our Gloversville area of this region, and we have another building which, it's almost identical to what we're proposing. MR. KRYZAK-This particular building is located in Meico, and it's almost identical to. MR. STONE-This building is going to be part of a fence? - 5 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. KRYZAK-That's correct. MR. GREEN-Bonnie, any questions? MRS. LAPHAM-Not right now, no. Most of them have been covered. MR. GREEN-Was the public hearing opened and closed? MR. GORALSKI-I believe it was left open. MR. GREEN-I'd ask for public comment, I guess. PUBLIC HEARING OPEN NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. GREEN-What are your feelings? MR. STONE-I have no objections to putting it there. Having looked at the site and looking at the neighborhood around it, it's very isolated, and I'm sure would continue to be that way, and it certainly is not an unattractive building to be on a site which is multifaceted, to say the least, with transformers and the high tension lines coming in. I have no problem with it. MR. GREEN-Don? MR. O'LEARY-No. I don't think there's any difficulty, given now that we know the storage of material is relatively innocuous and the traffic will be slight, a slight increase, if any at all. Plus the fact that it's adjacent to buildings on the south that are pretty much in keeping with commercial. MR. GREEN-Dave? MR. MENTER-Well, I'm not so sure the area is going to stay as remote as it is, but you did a job this time in terms of the information you put together, answered the questions that needed to be answered. I guess it's as good as it's going to get there. I'm not real happy with the location, but I sort of anticipated your answer to that question. So I guess I'd go along with it. MR. GREEN-Bob? MR. KARPELES-Well, they seem to meet the relaxed criteria, and they've answered the questions that we posed the last time. I think they've done a fairly good job. I'm not sure I'm really convinced that the proposed site, that there are compelling reasons which make the proposed site more feasible than others, but that one other site, your argument seemed a little weak to me, on securi ty . Can't you put a fence around it? I'm not sure it wouldn't be less visible at that other site than it is at this one. I'd like to be convinced a little more. MR. ALLEN-Again, we do have the land there. It is higher development costs because it's a well forested land, and also, one of the big primary concerns is the security. If we built the building, it would have to be set back behind the existing substation, and that area where we do have, there's a lot of dumping going on, and it's just not seen from the road, that area back there, and we have experiences of break-in's now. We have problems wi thin our fenced in yards. There's some fenced in substations where stuff is removed from, and when you have a building that's out of sight, it's a temptation, particularly when it's an area that's already trafficked. - 6 - -- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. KARPELES-Yes, but that's what we want to do is get it out of sight. MR. KRYZAK-Well, I think also there you have, adjacent or across the street, you have a fairly new subdivision in there, and as opposed to this particular site here, on Country Club Road, where basically it's surrounding by transmission lines and the available land that's left there is within the Plaza Commercial, and there is one residential lot in there, which is, I can't say whether it's going to be developed, but it's likely, within that area and the configuration of the transmission lines that go into our substation, it's probably not the most desirable place to put a residential dwelling. MR. KARPELES-Well, I guess it is more desirable than any of the other sites. I'll go along with that. I'd go along with it. MR. GREEN-Bonnie? MRS. LAPHAM-The biggest thing 1 was waiting to see if there was going to be any comment from the public because there are some residential sites north of that on Country Club Road, as you're going toward Sweet Road and Wincrest Road and so forth, but there's been no comment either in person or by mail. So it does seem like it's probably one of the better sites for you, and as long as your neighbors don't object, then I don't think I do either. MR. GREEN-Well, I have to pretty much agree with the Board and rely on that a little bit more. I was absent at the first meeting, but it seems like you've done an awful lot of research here to convince us this is the best site, no public comment in opposition to it. I guess I don't have any concerns either at this point. We just need a motion from someone, I guess. MOTION TO APPROVE USE VARIANCE NO. 70-1996 NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP., Introduced by David Menter who moved for its adoption, seconded by Louis Stone: Proposing to construct a storage building, a 50 by 80 foot storage building on Country Club Road, in the area of their current substation. The relaxed criteria to be applied to "Utilities are in effect, requiring the applicant to show that the proposed project is necessary to provide a safe and adequate service. They have done that. In addition, they have shown cause to utilize this site for this purpose, as opposed to other possible sites in the area, based on specific limitations of these other available sites. In addition to those criteria, it would not appear that this project would be a detriment to the health, safety or welfare of the surrounding community. There was no public opposition to this proposal, and given the physical characteristics of the property, it would appear to be the least relief necessary to accomplish the desired goals. Duly adopted this 16th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. O'Leary, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mrs. Lapham, Mr. Stone, Mr. Green NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Thomas NEW BUSINESS: AREA VARIANCE NO. 98-1996 TYPE II UR-10 JAMES HILL, JR. OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE 23 MALLORY AVENUE, OFF OF NATHAN APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A SECOND DWELLING UNIT ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY ZONED UR-10. THIS ADDITION WOULD NOT CONFORM TO THE DENSITY REQUIREMENTS - 7 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) THAT EACH DWELLING HAVE AT LEAST TEN THOUSAND SQUARE FEET OF LAND AREA. RELIEF IS BEING REQUESTED FROM THE DENSITY REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN SECTION 179-17. CROSS REF. SPR 64-96 TAX MAP NO. 117-5- 4.3 LOT SIZE: 0.24 ACRES SECTION 179-17 THERESA HILL, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 98-1996, James Hill, Jr, Meeting Date: October 16, 1996 "APPLICANT: James Hill PROJECT LOCATION: 23 Mallory Ave. Proposed Project and Conformance with the Ordinance: The applicant is proposing to remodel an existing home to include a second dwelling unit in the basement on a .24 acre piece of property. This addition would not conform to the density requirements that each dwelling have at least ten thousand square feet of land area. Relief is being requested from the density requirements listed in Section 179-17. Criteria for considering an Area Variance, according to Chapter 267, Town Law. 1. Benefit to the applicant: Relief would allow the applicant to construct a second dwelling on an existing house. 2. Feasible al terna ti ves : There appear to be no al terna t i ves that could satisfy the applicant's desire to construct a dwelling. 3. Is this relief substantial relative to the Ordinance? This 10,454 sq. ft. lot requires 20,000 sq. feet of land area in order to accommodate two dwellings. 4. Effects on the neighborhood or community? No negative impacts are expected with this application for relief. 5. Is this difficulty self created? The difficulty that exists is the desire of a property owner to construct a secònd dwelling in an existing home. Staff Comments & Concerns: This application is seeking to establish a second dwelling unit in an existing home by creating an apartment in an already built basement. Staff anticipates no negative impacts associated with this request. SEQR: Type II, no further action required." MR. THOMAS-Is there anything you'd like to add to the application? MS. HILL-No. MR. THOMAS-Could you just state your name for the record? MS. HILL-Theresa Hill. MR. THOMAS-Thanks. Questions from the Board members? MR. GREEN-I've got a question for Staff. What's the minimum square footage for an apartment? I mean, how big has this got to be to make it a living area? MR. GORALSKI-I believe it's 600 square feet. MR. GREEN-Okay, 600, I thought it was 800, MR. GORALSKI-Eight hundred for a single family, 600 for an apartment. MR. GREEN-Okay. So we're over that, then. MR. STONE-I have a question. How new is this home? MS. HILL-Two years old. MR. GREEN-Was this one of Mr. Clute's homes? MS. HILL-No. MR. GREEN-Clute Enterprises? - 8 - -< (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MS. HILL-No. MR. GREEN-He built a number of them down there. MS. HILL-No. This one wasn't one of his. MR. GREEN-Okay. MS. HILL-Fran Geroux. MR. KARPELES-Did you have the house built, or was it already built when you bought it? MS. HILL-No. He had the house built. MR. KARPELES-You had it built, right? MS. HILL-No, he had it built. brother. I'm just the agent. That's my MR. KARPELES-Okay. MR. STONE-But it was built as a one family house? MS. HILL-Yes, it was. MRS. LAPHAM-I'm a little confused. Is this the actual floor plan of what you have now, or is this what you're proposing to put in? MS. HILL-I'm trying to get my brother to hand me the map. Which one do you have? MRS. LAPHAM-The floor plan that shows, it looks like a raised ranch kind of. MS. HILL-Yes, it is. MRS. LAPHAM-With a living room, two bedrooms, kitchen and a bath. MS. HILL-Right. MRS. LAPHAM-That's what you have now, or that's what you're proposing? MS. HILL-He has a one bedroom upstairs. It was originally supposed to be a two bedroom. Because he's a single man, he just wanted a large bedroom. So the only difference is that bedroom. MR. MENTER-So this is existing then? MS. HILL-Yes, it is. MRS. LAPHAM-It's existing, but with one bedroom that you made bigger? MS. HILL-Right, yes. MR. GREEN-So the upstairs and downstairs are going to be almost identical? MS. HILL-Yes. MR. GREEN-These amendments are not in, though, at this point in the basement? MS. HILL-No. MR. STONE-How would the entrance to these two apartments be gotten? - 9 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MS. HILL-Through the front door, and they're going to cut it off. Maybe you can explain it a little bit better. They're going to cut it off from the front door to make their separate doors. One goes up the stairs, and one will go down into the apartment. MR. O'LEARY-The idea is to generate rental income to help amortize the mortgage? MS. HILL-Yes. MR. O'LEARY-What would be the capital investment in renovations, and what would be their payoff, and what would be the mortgage income and what would be the net? MS. HILL-I don't even know if that has been figured out at this point. At this point in time it hasn't been figured out. He, as far as the material, or you explain to me. MR. O'LEARY-Well, you know, if you invest a given amount of capital in the renovations, and then that's on borrowed money, and you have to repay that debt, then the additional rental income may not be sufficient to retire that debt as well as contribute to helping you retire your mortgage. MS. HILL-It might not be, but at this point in time, anything would help. The mortgage, I don't know what the loan amount that you took out, maybe. JAMES HILL MR. HILL-What do you want to know? MR. O'LEARY-The amount of money that would be invested in the renovation. MS. HILL-In the renovation, your loan. MR. HILL-It was $13,000. MR. O'LEARY-And I presume that would be borrowed? MS. HILL-Yes. MR. HILL-Yes. MR. 0' LEARY-And do we know what the term of the loan or the repayment would be? MR. HILL-The $13,OOO? MR. O'LEARY-Yes. MR. HILL-$157 a month. MR. O'LEARY-And what kind of rental income do you hope to get on the apartment? MR. HILL-I haven't decided that yet. MR. O'LEARY-Somewhere in the range of, do you have a guess of what's going for apartments like that in the area? MR. HILL-Yes. That's what I'm trying to figure out what's going on up in Queensbury. MS. HILL-Depending on the outlook, a two bedroom apartment, I'm renting something similar, well, I have a downstairs, but in the same area, back behind his house. There's a duplex there, and I'm - 10 - -- -../ (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) living in one and I know what I pay. I pay $585. I would say anywhere up from, depending on what he has down there. I know that he's going to have a washer and dryer down there, too, also. So I would say anywhere from $500 to $550. I don't know. MR. O'LEARY-But you feel that you'll have a positive cash flow? MS. HILL-Definitely. MR. O'LEARY-It would be a heck of a thing to find out it was negative. MS. HILL-I know, but at this point in time, like I said, anything would help, you know, when you're in a situation, poor planning, I would say. MR. THOMAS-Anyone else? MR. KARPELES-I've got a question for Staff. Are there any other two family houses in that area? MR. GORALSKI-Actually, there are several two family houses in that area, and I believe a couple of them received variances, back in 1990 or so, but there are several two family houses in that area. MR. KARPELES-Close? MR. GORALSKI-Yes, actually, within a couple of lots. MR. STONE-Two family of the same nature? I mean, starting out as a single family house? MR. GORALSKI-That I don't know. Like I say, there were a couple that I believe received variances, and then there were a lot that, I believe, were two families for quite a while. There's a mix, in that area, there's a mix of single family and two family houses. I mean, they live there. They could probably tell you exactly how many there are. MS. HILL-Like I said, well, the house that I'm living in, that's a duplex, but around the corner, which would be three houses around his corner, excuse me, two houses around his corner, is the same raised ranch, same style, same thing. I don't know if it started out that way, but that's what it is. This is the same exact thing, the same exact house almost. MR. GREEN-Just to get a little extra information on that one, I stopped and talked to the guy who was standing out on his front porch, because it looks very similar, the difference being that house is 46 or 48 feet long, 46 feet long, because I thought the same thing, and the guy was nice enough to take his measure out and measure his house for me, but he has three up and two down. MR. STONE-One of the concerns I have in looking at the property, the house is, and the question I asked earlier, it's two years old. It's fairly new. There's no auxiliary buildings were garbage cans are stored and things like that, and I was just concerned that possibly, with another family in there, there would be more material around. MS. HILL-That's true. There's ample space for parking, and also there's a shed out back, a rather large shed that is out back. MR. HILL-They've got garbage pick up. MR. STONE-Well, I realize. I wasn't suggesting that, but the cans and so on. One family may have one can. Two families have two cans, and it's just a concern, but there is a shed out back? I - 11 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) have to admit, I did not see it when I looked. I don't see it on the plan. MR. THOMAS-Anyone else? I'll open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MRS. LAPHAM-Well, what about letters? MR. THOMAS-All right. Lets have the letters, then. MRS. LAPHAM-Okay. We appear to have two letters. All right. This one, this is a notice of a meeting. All right. This also is a notice of a meeting. They must have been undelivered. MR. THOMAS-Yes. If they're in the envelopes and it's got the purple stamps on it, it's just that they weren't delivered. MRS. LAPHAM-Okay. Then there's this. MR. THOMAS-No. That's just a listing of the property owners around that the Staff uses to send out the notices. That's all that is. MRS. LAPHAM-Oka9'~- Then we have no public comment. MR. THOMAS-So there's no correspondence? MRS. LAPHAM-No. MR. THOMAS-The public hearing is still closed. We'll start with you, Lou. What do you think? MR. STONE-Well, basically I don't have a concern, except the fact that, here's a brand new home, relatively, two years old, that was built under the assumption that it was a one family home, and now, less than two years later, you're appearing before us saying you can't keep up the mortgage without making it a two family home. It troubles me. I agree, looking at the neighborhood, and looking at the home and everything around it, that it's probably not a problem, but I'm just a firm believer in the fact that we go into deals with our eyes open. It was a one family house. That's what it was designed to be, and after a relatively short period of time, you're asking us to make it a two family home. That's one of the reasons we have zoning. I'm just concerned. I still haven't made my mind up, but I want to listen to the rest of the Board. MR. THOMAS-Don? MR. O'LEARY-I have no problem with it. I would advise you, though, to get a handle on the numbers a little bit more accurate. MR. THOMAS-Bill? MR. GREEN-Well, I was initially concerned with the size. I guess we've cleared that up, although I still think it's not terribly big, just living in one area. My other concern is, there's an awful lot of these houses down here with, I would say, pretty darn close to the same floor plan type of structure. It seems that a lot more of them are going to be developing in that area. I'm a little worried about lots of these coming in or a convergence taking place. In and of itself, I think we could probably live with it, but, I'm thinking about the area around there, but apparently there are a number of other two family houses in there. - 12 - -- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. THOMAS-Dave? MR. MENTER-Well, I'm in the same boat as Lou. Theresa hit it on the head when she said poor planning. I just think that the benefit that it would be to you would certainly not carry much weight if it was going to have any negative impact at all on the community, on the area. Given the fact that there a~e a ,lot of similar properties right in the area, I may go along w1th 1t, but I don't have a good feeling about it, just because of the whole planning aspect, and it's only been two yea,rs, and it,' s go~ng to be two family forever. So, I guess I'm undec1ded at th1s p01nt, too. MR. THOMAS-Bob? MR. KARPELES-Well, I'm not going to help clear it up any because I'm kind of undecided myself. When I looked at it, the first that reaction I had was that this is an awfully small house to be a two family house. The fact that there's no neighborhood reaction, nobody seems to care, and the fact that Staff says it won't have any adverse effect on the neighborhood kind of mitigate that, but I'm still, I still feel that's an awfully small house to be a two family house, and I share Bill's concern about everyone else coming in and asking for the same thing, and that will definitely change the character of the neighborhood, if everybody does it. So, I'm kind of on the fence. MR. THOMAS-Bonnie? MRS. LAPHAM-I want to ask the applicant a question first, because a raised ranch really does lend itself to this kind of thing, because theré' 11 be no change from the outside. It will still appear to be a one family. So, I mean, you're not planning to change the outside? MS. HILL-No. MRS. LAPHAM-Okay. Is there anything in the lower level of your home now, or is it unfinished space? MS. HILL-It's unfinished. The only set up was the washer. Everything would be exactly the same way as it is upstairs, and which the upstairs was designed to have two bedrooms in it, to be a two bedroom upstairs. Right now, it's unfinished. MRS. LAPHAM-But basically the only thing you're going to be, you would be adding that you would not already be entitled to under zoning, in the style of this house, would be a kitchen? That would be the only thing you would be adding would be a kitchen? MS. HILL-Yes. MRS. LAPHAM-A raised ranch usually is finished off with a bath, a family room, and a couple of bedrooms. MS. HILL-Right. MRS. LAPHAM-Okay. I don't think I have an objection to it, really. I know the neighborhood has other two families also. MR. THOMAS-Yes. I'm not really thrilled about this, for the fact that I can see a whole line of people coming in now for variances for a second family or a second apartment in their building, and I think that will create a change in the neighborhood that's zoned UR-10, which is 10,000 square feet per dwelling. This is a new house, and if the applicant thought he was going to need additional income, he should have come to us and built a duplex and applied for a variance for a duplex before he built the house, or had the - 13 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) two dwelling units have at least one acre of land per dwelling unit. Relief is being requested from the density requirements listed in Section 179-20. Cri teria for considering an Area Variance, according to Chapter 267, Town Law. 1. Benefit to the applicant: Relief would allow the applicant to subdivide her property and have two dwelling units on less than two acres. 2. Feasible al ternati ves: The applicant may have the ability to subdivide this 3.4 acre lot into such a manner that both lots would meet the density requirements of the SFR-1A district. 3. Is this relief substantial relative to the ordinance? The applicant is seeking to subdivide this 3.4 acre property so that the two dwellings would have approximately 1.7 acres of land area. 4. Effects on the neighborhood or community? No negative impacts are expected with this application for relief. 5. Is this difficulty self created? It appears the applicant has the ability to create two lots which conform to the SFR-1A district. Staff Comments & Concerns: Should the ZBA wish to approve this variance I the applicant will have to follow this application with subdivision approval from the Planning Board. At that time, a survey of the property indicating proposed dimensions and area for each lot will need to be provided. SEQR: Type II, no further action required." MR. THOMAS-And nothing from Warren County. Do you have anything you want to add to the application? MRS. HALL-I thought I heard her saying three quarter acre lot in the beginning. MR. KARPELES-She read that wrong. She mean 3.4 acres. MR. THOMAS-Yes. MRS. LAPHAM-Sorry. MR. THOMAS-Questions from the Board for the applicant? MR. MENTER-You're living on the property now? MRS. HALL-Yes, I am. MR. MENTER-In the modular home? MRS. HALL-In the mobile home. living in this one here. This is Bennett Road here. I'm MR. MENTER-Okay. MR. STONE-You're at the back? MRS. HALL-Yes. MR. MENTER-Do you, are you renting the other two? MRS. HALL-I have someone renting the modular. They rented with the option of purchasing. MR. MENTER-Okay. Is that option of purchasing not relevant here? MRS. HALL-Well, when we started out, I've been listed as, I think it's 2.72 acres, and when I had it surveyed I ended up with the 3.47. When we started out, I offered to sell the home and the mobile home behind it, and divide the property in half for a certain price, and the person rented the home with that agreement. MR. MENTER-So that is the pending sale that you're trying to accomplish here? - 15 - '----- --..; (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) house built. There really isn't any other feasible avenue for the applicant to pursue, other than to sell the house and mc;>ve somewhere else where he can make the mortgage payments. I'm w1th the rest of you. I'm just about sitting on the fence here, and the difficulty wasn't self created. So, I don't know. Has somebody got a motion ready? Would someone like to make a motion? MOTION TO DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. 98-1996 JAMES HILL, JR., Introduced by David Menter who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Karpeles: Applicant is proposing to convert the first floor of a single family raised ranch into a second living floor in the house, so each floor would have a separate living quarters. This project would require relief from the density, which is 20,000 square feet for two dwellings. This project would benefit the applicant in that it would allow him to be able to more easily make payments on the house itself by having the income from the second residence. The relief is certainly substantial relative to the Ordinance. It's a 10,454 square foot lot, and in order for this lot to support two dwellings, it would need to be 20,000 square feet. The potential effects on the neighborhood could be great. Although there are homes in this area, structures in this area that do contain two dwellings, it is not the desired effect for this neighborhood, and each project that gets a variance for this increases the likelihood that further variances will be granted in the future. The hardship in this case and the difficulty, for purposes of this Ordinance, are self created in that they are not a result of aný characteristics of the property itself, rather unique to the applicant. Duly adopted this 16th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stone, Mr. Green, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mr. Thomas NOES: Mr. O'Leary, Mrs. Lapham MR. THOMAS-That's a five to two. The application is denied. MS. HILL-How do we go about appealing, or can we? I know we should be able to. MR. THOMAS-Yes. You can appeal it to the courts in what is called an Article 78, okay. If you want, you can call the Staff, Planning Staff, tomorrow morning and they can probably fill you in a little better on what the next step is on that. Okay. MS. HILL-Okay. All right. Thank you. AREA VARIANCE NO. 97-1996 TYPE II SFR-1A FERN C. HALL OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE 49 BENNETT ROAD OFF OF AVIATION ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO SUBDIVIDE AN EXISTING 3.4 ACRE LOT INTO TWO LOTS. ONE OF THE LOTS IS PROPOSED TO CONTAIN TWO DWELLING UNITS. TWO DWELLING UNITS ON ONE LOT WOULD NOT CONFORM TO THE DENSITY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SFR-1A DISTRICT. RELIEF IS BEING REQUESTED FROM THE DENSITY REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 179 - 2 0 . TAX MAP NO. 83-1- 5.1 LOT SIZE: 2.72 ACRES SECTION 179-20 FERN HALL, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 97-1996, Fern Hall, Meeting Date: October 16, 1996 "APPLICANT: Fern Hall PROJECT LOCATION: 49 Bennett Rd. Proposed Project and Conformance with the Ordinance: The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 3.4 acre lot into two residential lots. One lot is proposed to have two dwelling units on less than two acres. SFR-1A zoning requires that - 14 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MRS. HALL-Yes, the pending sale at the price I offered it would not include an acre for each building. MR. MENTER-Okay. So you're basically, you're trying to make it fit that. MRS. HALL-I want to keep some property around me. I mean, I started out with 18 acres years ago, and I mean, if you've seen the property, it's quite wooded, and the part out by the road, on the other side of the frontage, is not good for a lot, because it's below the road level, and if it were filled in, it would put the house on the right, down below the level of the land. MR. MENTER-So, just to get this straight, what you would like to see happen, where is the, is this where it says approximately? MRS. HALL-Yes. There's a line, I would like it to come something like this, but the person who did the survey for me said that it would be better if I put the stakes where I wanted them, and then they drew up the map. I have the map of the, the survey map of the whole property, minus this dividing line. I think I gave you an original. MR. MENTER-And that would leave you with? MRS. HALL-About an acre and, about 1.75 for each, more or less, depending on where that center line goes, where the dirt driveway is, because I need space. There are some trees growing there that, by my mobile home, that I don't want to cut. MR. STONE-The question is, the one lot would have the modular home and that second mobile home? MRS. HALL-Yes. The second mobile home is sort of a detached mother-in-law apartment. The water supply comes from the modular home because we got it from the City of Glens Falls years ago, and that was the only way that they would supply us with water. We had to go way out to West Mountain Road to get the water, and they wouldn't let us do that again. So the water supply comes from the modular home to the mobile home behind it, and the power comes from the pole by the modular home, to the mobile home. So it's sort of a detached mother-in-law apartment, is what we used to call it. MR. O'LEARY-Originally, when you had the sale pending, you thought you had something in the area of two and three quarter acres that you were going to divide in half? MRS. HALL-Yes. When we bought the property, like 35 years ago, it wasn't surveyed, and each piece that was taken off of it was just divided from the figure we were given in the building, and I ended up, in the beginning, and I ended up with 2.72, but then when I had it surveyed, I thought it looked bigger than that, and when I had it surveyed, it ended up 3.426. MR. O'LEARY-So then when you had the result of the survey showing closer to four, than two and three quarters. MRS. HALL-Three and a half. MR. O'LEARY-Yes, you said to yourself, I can make three building lots rather than two. MRS. HALL-No. My original agreement with the person who was renting my home with the option of purchasing it was that I would divide the property in half, more or less. That doesn't change the way I wanted it divided in the beginning, the fact that it shows on paper that it's more, because of the trees and the part of the property that's not good for building, and the fact that the mobile - 16 - -' (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) home that goes with the house is sort of connected to it. MR. STONE-But this is a mobile home. It can be moved. That's the definition of a mobile home. MRS. HALL-The one in back of the house that's going with it. MR. STONE-Yes, it could be moved off the lot. MRS. HALL-Yes. It's an older mobile home. It's settled in, but I mean, it could be. MR. STONE-It's still a mobile home. MRS. HALL-Yes. MR. STONE-Okay, I just wanted to ask that. MR. MENTER-Do you have stakes up there now, you said? MRS. HALL-No, I don't. MR. MENTER-I didn't see any. MRS. HALL-I was sort of waiting to see how this went before I put anYmore money into it. You know. MR. MENTER-Do you have any idea how far the front of your mobile home is? Do you have any idea what the distance from here might be? MRS. HALL-Well, it would be easy enough to figure, because it shows 103 feet to the back line. It looks like it might be 75 feet. MR. THOMAS-It's about 275 feet off the front property line, and well, it's 122 feet off the back property line. MR. MENTER-You answered it correctly, though. That's what I was asking. That's about right. MRS. HALL-To get at my mobile home, there are-" ~rees where that little porch shows, so I have to swing around that, and I can't come at it from any other direction, because the property slants downhill toward Hummingbird Lane. I would be in trouble in the winter trying to get in and out any other place. MR. KARPELES-I'm at a loss here. You've got 3.47 acres, and the zoning is one acre per lot. Why can't you just divide it up into three lots? MRS. HALL-Because I don't want to give him that much property for the price that I originally settled on with my rent/purchase agreement. MR. GREEN-But that was based on incorrect figures. MRS. HALL-It's still, my word was half of the property, no matter what it, I don't, now, want to give him two thirds of the property for the same price, and the price is not negotiable. He got a very good purchase price, because I thought that the money was going to be readily available, and I've waited two years now and a lot of things are changing. MR. GREEN-So, I guess I'm still a little confused. What is your main reasoning for not giving him two acres, versus one point seven acres? MRS. HALL-It's taken him two years to come up with the money as it - 17 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) is. If I suddenly say I want more money because it's two acres, the deal's going to go down the drain, and the mobile home is not I mean, the question about moving it, if it were moved, it wóuld b~ very expensive to provide services, because we're sort of back in nowhere and water and power have got to come a long way. MR. STONE-No. I meant, the problem with the zoning is there are two residences on this one lot. It doesn't meet the Code. Certainly you can have two 1.7 acre lots. It's the 1.7 acre lot with two homes on it in an area that is one acre. That's the problem. MRS. HALL-I understand that. That area originally was 100 feet by 150 feet of lot. That's what I'm surrounded with, all the way around. MR. STONE-Well, I'm saying that, to do what you want to do, to give him half the property, if you removed that mobile home, it meets the current Code. You took it off the property. You got rid of it. MRS. HALL-The mobile home is included in the sale. MR. GREEN-But that's what's causing the problem. MR. STONE-That's what's causing the problem. MR. GREEN-That's the second residence on a parcel that's only 1.7 acres. You cañ have one house on parcel that's 1.7. It's that you've got two on that one that you want to create at 1.7. There's the problem. So you take the second mobile home off, and there's no problem, and he can have 1.7 and you can have 1.7 and there's only one house on each lot. You don't need a variance. MRS. HALL-I see the point you're trying to make. I do not choose to give him more property for the same price, because by circumstance, it suddenly shows on paper that it went from 2.72 to 3.42. I don't feel I should be penalized for that. MR. STONE-But you're talking about giving him 1.7 acres. You said half. MRS. HALL-Correct, more or less. I mean, he's going to get a little bit less than that, and I'm getting a little bit more, by the time we straighten out that. MR. STONE-Okay, but the problem is that on whatever you give him, if it's certainly less it even gets more of a problem, because there's still going to be two principle residences on this lot which is zoned for one on the amount of land you have. I understand the deal you have, but that's the problem, two residences on less than two acres. MRS. HALL-I am surrounded by property which is, the lots are 100 feet by 150 feet, sort of like four to an acre, I think. MR. THOMAS-Yes, that was subdivision approval for different subdivisions. MRS. HALL-No. They were put there before zoning. If you're talking about Woodbury's, okay, but the houses on Bennett Road and Eldridge Road were there long before the Town had zoning. MR. THOMAS-Is that mobile home behind the modular occupied right now? MRS. HALL-Not right now, no. - 18 - .~ ---'" (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. THOMAS-What kind of condition is it in? there. I didn' t get back MRS. HALL-It's an older mobile home, and it doesn't look too good now because the pipe froze in the winter and it needs scrubbing down, but it's in very good shape for the age. It's only been lived in by couples. There's never been children in it. It was my daughter's. MR. THOMAS-Do you know how old that home is? MRS. HALL-It was put in before zoning. I don't remember when the zoning went in. MR. THOMAS-The zoning went in in '62. MRS. HALL-I mean, it's painted on the inside. It's carpeted. MR. THOMAS-See, the problem here is, as the Board members have stated, that you have a way out, without even being here, of dividing it into three, one acre lots, selling off two and keeping one for yourself, but you stated you don't want to do that. The only way that you could really get around it is to haul that mobile home off there. MRS. HALL-Well, his purchase of the house at the price was with the premise that he could rent that home and help make his mortgage payment. MR. THOMAS-Anyone else have any questions for the applicant before I open the public hearing? MRS. LAPHAM-Well, the only comment I wanted to make is if that mobile home was there before 1962, that means it doesn't have a HUD seal, most likely, which means, is it okay to live in it, as far as the Town is concerned? MR. GORALSKI-You couldn't bring that mobile home into Town right now without the HUD seal, but I believe because it's been there, that they could occupy it again. MRS. HALL-That's what I've been told. MR. THOMAS-Anyone else have any questions? MR. KARPELES-Well, is there any way that that could be divided into three lots and have adequate frontage on a public road, on all three lots? MR. THOMAS-I did some quick math. If you divide that up right, you can get 120 foot lot front per lot. MR. KARPELES-So it could be divided. MR. GORALSKI-There are two options. One is to divide it into a lot that's two acres and a lot that's 1.425 acres or 1.426 acres, or, I believe, I haven't actually laid it out, but I believe you can cut it up into three lots also and meet all the dimensional requirements. MRS. HALL-There are trees in the center of this part which we want to keep. There are trees here. This is not buildable. There are trees and a bank here that goes to a brook. MR. THOMAS-Anyone else have any questions? I'll open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED - 19 - (Queensb~ry ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) JANI CE M. DORMAN MRS. DORMAN~My name is Janice M. Dorman and I live at 12 Hummingbird Lane. I have neighbors all concerned because of the trailers that are, the mobile homes that are on these lots, and our concern mainly is that if there's any condition approved on anything, that you would do what, Fern, you would indicate that there be no new mobile homes put on any kind of lot divisions, and in reference to any deed, we would want it quoted that there be no more mobile homes allowed over there, otherwise it's going to become like a trailer park. I'm not quite sure on the understanding what exactly she's doing, except wanting to divide it into two, but you're sitting here saying she can divide it into three parts, and again, we're all going to be concerned about having more mobile homes in this area, which will decrease our value in our homes on Hummingbird Lane. MR. THOMAS-Well, she cannot bring in anymore mobile homes without a variance, because this area is outside of what they call the Mobile Home Overlay, which is on the Luzerne Road has one, just beyond the Northway on the right hand side there, that mobile home park there, that's in the Mobile Overlay district, but any land outside the Mobile Home Overlay district, you cannot bring a mobile home in there without coming to the Zoning Board of Appeals to bring one in. So there's no way that she's going to be able to bring in anymore, unless she comes before us. MRS. DORMAN-Okay. MR. GORALSKI-A point of clarification, though. She could bring in a newer mobile home to replace the one that's there without getting a Use Variance. MR. THOMAS-It would have to be the same size. MR. GORALSKI-Correct. MR. THOMAS-It would have to be the same exact size. MR. GORALSKI-Right, or smaller. MR. THOMAS-Or smaller. MRS. DORMAN-Okay. Thank you. MR. THOMAS-You're welcome. MR. KARPELES-And in the same location, right? MR. GORALSKI-And put it in the same location. MR. THOMAS-Anyone else who'd like to speak opposed to this application? ANDREA EICHLER MRS. EICHLER-Hello. My name is Andrea Eichler. I live on 9 Hummingbird Lane. I am also kind of confused about what exactly is supposed to be happening there. I'm the last house on the road and the current mobile home that is on there is directly next door to me. I'm not sure if that's the one that's being sold, if that property is being sold. I do know when the original mobile home went in there, probably 10 or 12 years ago, it was done on a variance, and the variance was granted on a hardship, the fact that her family had nowhere else to go, it was my understanding. I understand now how that trailer was moved and another one was put in its place, and there was no need for any kind of public input or anything because one was already there. Is this correct? - 20 - --- . .---- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. GORALSKI-That's correct. MRS. EICHLER-That's the way it works. I do have a petition signed by the neighbors on Hummingbird Lane. They're all very concerned about any new trailers going in, and you've certainly put some of those concerns to rest. They would not want this variance approved if anything like that could happen. There are three trailers sitting there now, and one, there's two on the property. There's one adjacent to the property. So while it's not on the same property, it is right next to it, on Bennett Road, and to bring more in, you can understand our concerns with that, with property values. So, this petition could be a moot point if no more trailers can be brought in without more variances. MR. THOMAS-That's right. They cannot put another trailer, an additional trailer, on that property without a variance. MRS. EICHLER-So can you explain to me exactly how it's trying to be divided, then? Because now, I mean, I live there and I'm confused. MR. THOMAS-Okay. What it is, Mrs. Hall has 3.426 acres of land, okay, and what she wants to do is split it in half to approximately 1.7 acres per lot. Okay, and she wants to retain one half for herself, where her mobile home is on the Hummingbird Lane end, and sell the other half that has the modular with the mobile behind it to the person that now rents the modular. MRS. EICHLER-So where is Hummingbird in relation to this? MR. THOMAS-Hummingbird is over to the far right side of the page, where it says "HU" and half the "M". MR. GORALSKI-This is where the modular and the mobile home are. She wants to sell off this section with these two. The reason she's here for a variance is because she could only create this lot if it was two acres, to have two dwelling units on it. MRS. HALL-May I ask where you live? MRS. EICHLER-Right at the end of the road, of Hummrngbird, directly at the end of Hummingbird. Well, that's our concern. If it's not pertinent, then it's not a concern, if variances would have to be applied for. MR. THOMAS-Yes. To bring any new mobile homes on, a variance would have to be applied for. MRS. HALL-May I ask where the mobile home on Bennett Road is? MIKE NELSON MR. NELSON-That's Eldridge. MRS. EICHLER-Well, Eldridge becomes Bennett. It's all kind of one big thing. It's all the same exact area, you know, so you've got three mobile homes, whether it's Bennett, Eldridge or Hummingbird, it's all right in that same little triangle of land, and that was our concern. MR. THOMAS-Okay. MR. MENTER-There wouldn't be any effect on the number of mobile homes. MRS. EICHLER-Great. Thank you. MR. MENTER-The requirements to increase the number is still the - 21 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) same, and it doesn't change any of that. property line is drawn here. It's just where the MR. NELSON-My name is Mike Nelson. I live on Six Hummingbird Lane, and I'm not sure if I'm speaking for or against here. I guess it's more of a point of clarification. A number of my neighbors, myself included, when we received our notice, I think we were a bit confused by how it was worded, and I think some of us were dismayed that perhaps two additional dwelling units, which some may have interpreted to be two additional homes, were going to be added to this parcel. That point has been cleared up. One of the things that I think perhaps needs to be said is that I, personally, am encouraged by Mrs. Hall's desire to keep the trees and the character of her wooded lot as it is, and I guess I'm sensitive to her dilemma, and I'm encouraged that no additional mobile homes are going to be placed on the property. That's not to say that mobile homes, in and of themselves, are bad or evil. I lived in one for a number of years growing up. However, due to their, just the size, they do lend themselves to having a number of outbuildings and other pieces of things that simply cannot be stored inside. So I guess what I want to say is I want to be neighborly, and I'm sensitive to your situation, Mrs. Hall. MRS. HALL-May I ask where you live. MR. NELSON-I live in John Dial's old house. I live, you're here. I'm there. So, it is a dilemma that the mobile home behind the modular I think has fallen into disrepair, and I think I'm a little, at least outwardly, and I would be hopeful that if the variance was granted that some attention would be paid to the quality of that home, and therefore the tenants that would be moving in, but I guess our biggest concern was that no additional mobile homes would be put in. So, I guess that's it. MRS. HALL-May I add that the man who intends to buy my house can't wait to get his hands on that mobile home and spruce it up. MRS. EICHLER-The only thing I would add, when that second trailer was put in on the lot, there were some stipulations that were with it, a fence had to have been erected. The road that was going through there, from Hummingbird over to Bennett, something had to be put there to block the road, so traffic wasn't going through there, a log was dropped across there, so that did take care of that. A kind of checkerboard fencing was put up in front of the trailer. The idea was, since the residents that lived on Hummingbird at that time didn't realize that the trailer was going in at the end of Hummingbird, it was listed off Bennett Road. So we were unaware that that's exactly what was happening until after the fact. After it went up, we asked that some kind of block be put up so it wasn't, you couldn't see it from Hummingbird, so you could maintain the sort of neighborhood that we were trying to have. One of the other stipulations was greenery. Evergreens were to be planted to keep that break there and to keep it separate, and that really hasn't been done. There was a pine tree that was granted, and that is growing, and by the nature of the beast, its branches are high. There was an evergreen that was planted that died. I would ask that that stipulation be enforced if this variance is approved. It's all deciduous trees there. In the fall, in the winter when the leaves are all down, it's very, very easy to see through there, and that's what we were hoping to not have go in under the original agreement. So I don't know if this is for the zoning Board or for the Planning Board, but I would ask that some kind of evergreen barrier be erected there along that line. Thank you. MR. MENTER-While you're there, I missed the whole Hummingbird Road. I see it over here on the right, but is that a dead end? MRS. EICHLER-Yes, it dead ends onto, I think, Mrs. Hall's property. - 22 - -- -- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. MENTER-Does it stop right on your property? MRS. HALL-Yes, it does. MR. MENTER-Okay, because I didn't even notice it when I was there. MRS. EICHLER-Yes. It's just a very small street. I don't think, I think there are probably a dozen houses on it between Hummingbird and Robin. MR. MENTER-And at the end here, there's one on each side of it. MRS. EICHLER-On either side of the road, right. MRS. HALL-I have the original minutes of that meeting. We were never required to block the end of the road. The road cannot be blocked. I agreed not to go in and out of it, but that's not a requirement. The trees were planted. They're still growing. They came up and checked them afterward. They're growing in back of the logs that we put up to hide the end of mY trailer. MR. THOMAS-Okay. Anyone else have any comments they'd like to make before I close the public hearing? Any correspondence? MRS. LAPHAM-No. MR. THOMAS-I'll close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. THOMAS-Okay. Don, what do you think? MR. O'LEARY-Well, I'd like to get a clarification, if I could, Mr. Chairman. Mrs. Hall, at the time that you negotiated the sale and you assumed that there were two and three quarter acres, and had the survey turned out to be two and three quarter acres, we would not be here today. Do I have that right? One of the things you've been saying over and over again is that you did not want to give half of the property at the existing price that was negotiated. That confused me a little bit. MRS. HALL-No. When we started out, my tax map showed the 2.72. MR. O'LEARY-Right. MRS. HALL-And I said that I would divide the property in half, because I realized with three buildings at three acres, there was no, I mean, somebody was going to come up short, and because of the layout of the property, to keep privacy for both of us, I mean, I spent about a week with little pieces of paper, juggling them around, trying to figure out how to do it evenly, and the way that line goes now, it's exactly half on each side. MR. O'LEARY-I mean, the simplest thing for me to ask, then, would be, what effect would the ruling on the request for this variance have on the pending sale, any, for or against, how would it effect? MRS. HALL-For, the sale would go forward. Against, I'm not sure. The lease expires. My tenant showed no interest in renewing it, when I pushed and came up with mortgage money, and I'm fast approaching the point where I can't take advantage of my senior citizen tax break, if you rule against, in view of the fact I don't have a valid lease. I mean, he's put a lot of money into redoing the kitchen and the bathroom and the house, but it's on paper that that was at his own peril. It's going to be a mess. I mean, I - 23 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) could not, in all conscience, say, out, and benefit from the new kitchen and bathroom. Somewhere along the line I would feel I should repay him. I will not go forward with the sale if I have to give two acres. Because there's no way I could divide it and have access to the part that I want to keep. MR. O'LEARY-Thank you. MR. THOMAS-What do you think, Don? Yes, no, maybe? MRS. HALL-You've taken me from the small lots to the half acre lots to the acre lots. I mean, it's still the same property. We used to be able to build two family houses without applying. Now you have to get approval for that. It looks like I'm the tail that's wagging the dog. MR. O'LEARY-The Staff points out that there are alternatives. I've heard the Board talk about alternatives. The sale complicates, the terms of the sale complicates it, which mayor may not be relevant. So to tell you the truth, at this stage of the game, I'm really not sure how I feel about it. MR. THOMAS-Bill? MR. GREEN-I see no reason for a need for a variance. There's two options here, take the mobile home off or give it the two acres. You just mentioned your lease has expired. So that would, essentially, nullify any previous agreements you may have made. MRS. HALL-It does except for Gentleman's Agreements, and the mobile home was included in the purchase. MR. GREEN-Well, then in my opinion you should give him the two acres and you won't need the variance. MR. THOMAS-Dave? MR. MENTER-It's always tough when you have an Area Variance where you have totally, so subjective. I've got to agree with Bill. I think there are options, and there's really more than one option. I don't think that that agreement that was made with, you know, the agreement you made at some time in the past, is a reason to modified or to grant this type of variance, given the fact that it is a sizeable piece of property and it can, a couple of different ways, fall within the zoning. MR. THOMAS-Bob? MR. KARPELES-Well, I guess I essentially agree. We're obligated to give minimum relief, and there are solutions here where no relief is necessary. So I really would have trouble bringing myself to give any. MR. THOMAS-Bonnie? MRS. LAPHAM-Well, I think I have to agree with the three gentlemen here that suggested, because there are at least two options, if not possibly more in this case, but there are two that are right here that we can all see. So I just can't see granting a variance when we have two options. The trees that you're concerned about not cutting. If you deed more land over to him, you could have a deed restriction, saying that trees are not to be cut from this section, whatever section of the lot you're giving him that you're trying to hold back because of the trees, but, I mean, your attorney could help you with that, with deed restrictions and so forth. So I would have to say that I really don't feel that we should grant a variance on this project. - 24 - -- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. THOMAS-Lou? MR. STONE-I agree with everyone who's spoken ahead of me, that we are bound to consider the current zoning. I mean, I hear what you're saying, that it's been changed on you over, the years, but that is what we have to look to, the current zon~ng. There are many options. There are at least two, as we've talk~d about: that can be considered. The deal that you talk about ~s certa~nly a self created difficulty. It's nothing that the Town of Queensbury had anything to do with. Therefore, I agree that we should not grant a variance. MR. THOMAS-I have to concur with the rest of the Board members. There are two other options, as stated before, that the applicant can pursue to alleviate this, and there are two very simple ones. When Mrs. Hall first thought she had 2.72 acres of land and she was going to divide it in half, that would give her 1.36 acres. Now that she finds out she has 3.42 acres, if she deeds off two acres, it still leaves her with 1.4 acres, which is just a touch more than what you had thought you had or would get. MRS. HALL-Excuse me. I don't seem to be able to make my point clearly enough for you to understand what I'm trying to say. You can rule whatever way you have to, but I'm trying to say that I was going to divide the property in half and it didn' t make any difference what it said on paper. MR. THOMAS-Yes, but you thought you had 2.72 acres. MRS. HALL-Morally, it did not. I was going to divide it in half. I'm still going to divide it in half. Because I ended up with more on paper makes no difference. MR. THOMAS-Okay, but what you thought you had in the beginning was 2.72, like you stated, and half of that is 1.36. MRS. HALL-Right. It would have been for him also. MR. THOMAS-Yes, right, for him also, but you don't even need to be here if you divided it 1.4 and 2. You wouldn't even need to be here. MRS. HALL-I don't intend to do that. MR. THOMAS-Like I say, you have two options that you wouldn't even have to be here. So I really can't grant this, because of what we're empowered to do and the rules and regulations that we have to live by, as set forth in the State Charter. MRS. HALL-That's fine. May I request a copy of the minutes, so that I can show my tenant that I did my darndest? MR. THOMAS-Yes. You can. It'll probably be, what a week or ten days before Maria gets them typed up, and they're also being recorded. So you might be able to get a copy of that. How you get that, I couldn't tell you, but having said that, I'm looking for a motion. MOTION TO DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. 97-1996 FERN C. HALL, Introduced by William Green who moved for its adoption, seconded by Louis Stone: The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 3.4 acre lot into two residential lots. One lot is proposed to have two dwelling units on less than two acres. The current zoning of Single Family One Acre zone requires that the dwelling units have at least one acre per unit, for a total of two acres. This brought about the relief being requested from Section 179-20. The benefit to the applicant - 25 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) would be that she'd be able to subdivide her property in the manner that she had previously agreed to with the proposed purchaser. Due to the size of the lot, there does appear to be a number of alternatives where all three dwelling units could end up with a minimum of one acre each. I feel that since there are alternatives that could meet the Code, or relief is substantial relative to the Ordinance, I don't feel there would probably be a large impact on the neighborhood or community, other than the fact of granting additional variances, which we try to avoid. It does appear that it's self created, again in the fact that there are options that could meet the Code, that the applicant does not appear to want to accept. Duly adopted this 16th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Green, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mrs. Lapham, Mr. Stone, Mr. O'Leary, Mr. Thomas NOES: NONE MR. THOMAS-The application is denied, and if you need copies of the minutes, they'll be typed up in a week to ten days, just stop downstairs in the Planning Office there, and they can get a copy there, and like I said, it's also audio taped. So if you want to get a copy of that, you'd have to talk to Maria about that. MR. GORALSKI-The best thing to do is call ahead of time, and we can make the copies, and they'll be ready for you. SIGN VARIANCE NO. 86-1996 TYPE: UNLISTED SR-1A CAROLYN AND ROBERT RUDOLPH OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE 749 RIDGE ROAD AT THE INTERSECTION OF CHESTNUT RIDGE AND RIDGE ROAD APPLICANTS ARE PROPOSING TO USE A FREESTANDING SIGN FOR THE PURPOSES OF ADVERTISING AN EXISTING BED AND BREAKFAST BUSINESS. THE SIGN WOULD BE 18 INCHES TALL AND IS PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED TWO FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. RELIEF IS BEING REQUESTED FROM THE PLACEMENT AND NUMBER REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN SECTION 140-6B,3 AND THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN SECTION 140 - 6B, 1. WARREN COUNTY PLANNING 10/9/96 TAX MAP NO. 54-5-11.2 LOT SIZE: 1.72 ACRES SECTION 140- 6B,3 SECTION 140-6B,1 CAROLYN & ROBERT RUDOLPH, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Sign Variance No. 86-1996, Carolyn and Robert Rudolph, Meeting Date: October 16, 1996 "APPLICANT: Carolyn & Robert Rudolph PROJECT LOCATION: 749 Ridge Rd. PROPOSED PROJECT AND CONFORMANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE: The applicant proposes to construct a freestanding sign in order to advertise a bed & breakfast location on their property. The sign is proposed to be 18 inches tall and setback two feet from the front property line. The use of a freestanding sign and the proposed setback are not allowed under the Sign Ordinance. Relief is being requested from the placement and number requirements for signs listed in Section 140-6B,3. 1. How would you benefit from the granting of this Sign Variance? Relief would allow the applicant to construct a freestanding sign to identify their bed & breakfast. 2. What effect would this sign have on the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community? It appears the requested sign variance would not have a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood. 3. Are there feasible alternatives to this variance? There may be no other alternative to providing identification of this bed & breakfast. The applicant may have the ability to move the proposed sign back from the front property line to conform with the required 15 foot setback. 4. Is the amount of relief substantial relative to the Ordinance? The applicant is seeking a sign in a residential district that is proposed to be 2 - 26 - '-- -- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) feet off the property line. The required setback for freestanding signs is 15 feet. 5. will the variance have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood? No adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood are anticipated with the proposed request for relief. Staff Comments and Concerns Staff is supportive of this request for signage at this location. The signage appears necessary in order to identify the existence of a bed & breakfast at this location. The ZBA should look at the feasibility of having any signage conform to the required eetbacke for frccntanding oignn. SEQR: Unlisted, short form EAF review needed." MRS. LAPHAM- "At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board, held on the 9th day of October 1996, the above application [or a Siqll Variance to use a freestandinq siqn for the purposeso.f__adve.r.tJJling an existinq bed and breakfast business. was reviewed and the following action was taken. Recommendation to: No County Impact." Signed by C. Powel South, Chairperson. MR. THOMAS-All right. Is there anything you'd like to add to the application? MR. RUDOLPH-I think it covers it. MR. THOMAS-Okay. MR. RUDOLPH-I'm Robert Rudolph. MRS. RUDOLPH-Carolyn Rudolph. MR. THOMAS-Any questions from the Board members? MR. O'LEARY-I guess the basic question I have is why the two feet instead of the fifteen, because the sign wouldn't be as visible? MRS. RUDOLPH-Well, it would be in the middle of our living room, because our house sits so close to the road. MR. O'LEARY-You couldn't open the windows or anything. MR. RUDOLPH-Yes. If you look at Exhibit B, you''Can see that the house sits very close to the property line. MRS. RUDOLPH-It's a 200 year old house, and it was built long before Ridge Road became wider. MR. O'LEARY-Yes. How close is the house to the road edge? MR. RUDOLPH-The front porch is probably three or four feet from the property line. MR. STONE-I noticed on your mailbox you have an extra large sign identifying the ownership of the mailbox. It was very specific. It appears to me, however, that that is signage of a type, because it sits directly across from your thing. The only thing lacking is an arrow. I recognize there is no arrow. That isn't enough for your guests to identify your approximate location? MRS. RUDOLPH-Unfortunately it isn't, because it's on the other side of the road, and people are looking for the house and they're not looking on the other side of the road, and we've had guests tell us that they've driven up and down the road several times, embarrassingly, because they're looking for the house and a sign, and people just don't look at mailboxes, apparently. I mean, even that doesn't attract their attention. MR. STONE-If we were to grant the Sign Variance, would you consider reducing the size of that sign? - 27 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MRS. RUDOLPH-Yes. Of course. MR. RUDOLPH-It get removes every winter, almost, with the snowplows. MR. STONE-Along with the mailbox and everything else. MR. KARPELES~How long has that been a bed and breakfast? MR. RUDOLPH-About four and a half years. MR. KARPELES-I think, isn't this a temporary variance for that? MR. GORALSKI-No. You approved it permanently last year, I believe. MR. RUDOLPH-This past spring. MRS. RUDOLPH-Basically, we just want people to find us more easily, and they can't. People from out of town, they're not used to the area, they're not used to the road, and they just, as clearly as we make the directions, they still look for a sign. I guess most people do, and when they don't see the sign, they don't find us real quick, and it's embarrassing, and people say, well, why don't you have a sign? MR. STONE-Is this sign going to be on both sides? MR. RUDOLPH-Yes. MR. STONE-It's going to be hanging perpendicular to the road? MR. RUDOLPH-Yes. MRS. RUDOLPH-Something tasteful. I mean, we've gotten historic awards from the Town of Queensbury and Glens Falls Historical Association. So we're certainly not going to do anything that's going to be detrimental to the house. MR. MENTER-How far from the road would the sign actually be? MR. RUDOLPH-From the physical? Probably 10 or 12 feet, maybe more than that, 15 feet maybe. MR. GREEN-There's a stone wall that runs down through there, right? MR. RUDOLPH-There is a stone wall, yes. MR. GREEN-You would be on the inside of that wall? MR. RUDOLPH-Yes. The stone wall really isn't on our property. MRS. RUDOLPH-Yes. If they ever did anything to the road, we'd probably have to move it. There's a road setback or something. MR. RUDOLPH-And again, if you look at Exhibit B, you can see how far back the line is. The power line is shown on that drawing, and that's roughly about where the stone wall is. MR. STONE-The illumination you're showing is just like a standard? MR. RUDOLPH-It's going to be like a lamplight. MR. STONE-You're not going to have spotlights on it? MR. RUDOLPH-The intent would be to put ground level, low voltage lighting, possibly to help illuminate that sign, and we have low level lighting focused on the house, as we speak, just to help - 28 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) light it up. MRS. RUDOLPH-Help people find us. MR. RUDOLPH-Yes. MR. GREEN-From which direction would you say the majority of your first time traffic comes from? MRS. RUDOLPH-From the south. MR. RUDOLPH-Most of them come from Quaker Road. MR. GREEN-Up Ridge Road. MRS. RUDOLPH-From the Exit at Exit 19, and come up 254 to Ridge. MR. GREEN-Did you look at the possibility of putting the sign over here on this southerly corner of the property, rather than directly in front, you know, to the south of the home, there seems to be a large area there. MR. RUDOLPH-There are several large pine trees there that are right along the road. MRS. RUDOLPH-Plus the property sinks down. It goes, from the road is drops quite a lot. When the house was built, the road was much lower. MR. THOMAS-Does anyone else have any questions, before I open the public hearing? MRS. LAPHAM-Would there be a problem with them putting a sign on the house itself? MR. THOMAS-They would still need a variance for it. MRS. LAPHAM-So either way? MR. THOMAS-Yes, either way. MRS. LAPHAM-Even if it were to just say their name, rather than the bed and breakfast? MR. THOMAS-Well, they can put their name on there, but they can't advertise the fact that there's a business there. They can put "The Rudolphs" there, but they can' t put "Sanford's Ridge Bed & Breakfast", because that's a commercial sign. MRS. LAPHAM-Yes, well, my thinking is sort of going in that direction, but we'll discuss that later. MR. THOMAS-Okay. MRS. RUDOLPH-Well, we wouldn't want to put a sign on the house, just because it is historic structure. It's the oldest house in Queensbury, and it's just, would not make the house look nice to put a sign on the house. It would look better to have a freestanding sign, rather than to tarnish what the house would look like, to put a sign against it. MR. RUDOLPH-I think, too, if the house ever went back to a residence, you certainly could use the signage, the lamppost as well as put your name on it, which many people do. MRS. LAPHAM-Would that require a variance, the lamppost with their name on it? - 29 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. THOMAS-No. It's the fact that they're advertising a commercial business. If the Rudolphs names were Sanford's Ridge Bed & Breakfast, we couldn't do anything about it, but that's not their name. I'll open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED ROGER RUEL MR. RUEL-I live at 748 Ridge Road. I am a neighbor directly across the street from this property. I know these people and what they have accomplished so far, in that home. I have absolutely no objections to this sign. Thank you. MR. THOMAS-Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. THOMAS-Any correspondence? MRS. LAPHAM-No. MR. THOMAS-All right. I'll start with Bill this time. What do you think? MR. GREEN-Well, I'm certain anything that goes up there would be very nicely done. I guess it's going to be, I'm looking at the design of the sign. It would almost appear, probably, to be just a name identification rather than a real commercial sign in nature. I would just ask that we make sure we get the sign off the mailbox. MR. THOMAS-Dave? MR. MENTER-What's the actual size of the sign? MR. RUDOLPH-Eighteen inches high by thirty inches wide. I think the drawing may be a little higher and a little narrower, but it doesn't exceed the square footage. MRS. RUDOLPH- It's basically the same size as the other bed & breakfast on Ridge Road, the Crislip size sign. MR. MENTER-Actually, application. I've been kind of anticipating this MR. RUDOLPH-You have to keep up with the Jones. guess we're trying to up with the Crislips. In our case, I MR. MENTER-Yes. Well, I know we discussed that a little bit when we actually did their application. MRS. RUDOLPH-Unfortunately people, they think that the Crislips are us because we don't have a sign, and it really would help stop the confusion of the two. MR. MENTER-Well, it's a business that has no home in this Town. So it kind of came in after the zoning, but I think that, I don't see any problem with it really at all. I don't think there's a better location for it. I think given the proximity of the house to the road, that type of sign is really the only one that would work there. You want people to be able to see it as clearly as they can, because when you're right next to a building and you're trying to figure out it is, I think there is a safety issue there. So I don't have a problem with it. MR. THOMAS-Bob? - 30 - ",,"-,- '-" (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. KARPELES-Well, I agree that there is a safety issue. I know whenever we're looking at properties along Ridge Road, or I'm looking at them, I always feel very leery when I pull off the road that somebody's going to ram me, and I think anything you can do to help people identify it quicker has got to be a plus. I really hate to see signs there, but in this case, I think it would be a plus. MR. THOMAS-Bonnie? MRS. LAPHAM-Well, I agree up to a point. I just feel, I hate to see a commercial sign although, I like the bed & breakfast. I love what you've done to the house. I just hate to see a commercial sign on Ridge Road. I think that's the only place for the sign and the only type of sign you could have, but I would feel better if you would replace bed & breakfast with your name, and I wouldn't even care if you left the Sanford's Ridge on the mailbox, I see that every time I go down the road. It would just be a matter of telling your guests to look for the house with the sign that says the Rudolphs. Crislips does have their name. MRS. RUDOLPH-That's the name of their bed & breakfast, though. MR. RUDOLPH-Yes, it's Crislip's bed & breakfast. MR. THOMAS-Lou? MR. STONE-I see no real problem with it. I share the concerns, obviously, one more sign is one more sign. I certainly would condition any approval on the removal of the sign on the mailbox. Obviously, the mailbox itself could say, in smaller letters, Sanford's Ridge Bed & Breakfast, if that's the name to which most of the mail comes, as long as the Post Office doesn't disagree, but certainly the size of that sign has to go, but other than that, I have no problem with it. MR. THOMAS-Don? MR. O'LEARY-I have nothing to add. MR. THOMAS-All right. I'm right there with Don. I have nothing to add. I would like to see, if this were passed, the sign on the mailbox removed, and I would also ask that they not be under high intensity lighting, to light it up. The proposed lighting that would illuminate it would be fine. Do you remember, John, what the Crislip's sign was? MR. GORALSKI-The size you mean? MR. THOMAS-Yes, the size? MR. RUDOLPH-I think theirs was 3.72, and I think ours is 3.75 as proposed. MR. THOMAS-Okay. It seems to me it was right around the same size. MR. GORALSKI-Yes. I believe it's approximately the same size, but I don't know what the exact dimensions were. I believe it was under four square feet. MR. THOMAS-Yes. Okay. Was the Town Board thinking about doing anything about sign variance, or Sign Ordinance, with respect to bed & breakfasts, because they are becoming more popular in the Town, we do have several of them now. MR. GORALSKI-Not that I know of. MR. THOMAS-Okay. Well, the next time I see the boys and the girls, - 31 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) I'll mention it. Having said that, I'm looking for a motion. One way or the other. MOTION TO APPROVE SIGN VARIANCE NO. 86-1996 CAROLYN AND ROBERT RUDOLPH, Introduced by Robert Karpeles who moved for its adoption seconded by David Menter: I The applicants propose to construct a freestanding sign in order to advertise a bed and breakfast location on their property. The sign will be 18 inches tall and set back two feet from the property line. The existing sign on the mailbox across the road will be removed. Relief will allow this applicant to construct a freestanding sign to identify their bed and breakfast, and it is thought that this will alleviate the problems of, actually be a benefit to safety as it will prevent people from driving back and forth on the road looking for the bed and breakfast. There did not appear to be any alternatives to providing identification for this bed and breakfast. There are no adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood, and the neighbors are supportive, any comment that we've had from the neighbor, is supportive of this sign. The sign would be two feet from the property line and grant relief of 13 feet from the Ordinance. The Short Environmental Assessment Form has been reviewed and the Board sees no adverse environmental impacts. Duly adopted this 16th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mrs. Lapham, Mr. Stone, Mr. O'Leary, Mr~Green, Mr. Thomas NOES: NONE AREA VARIANCE NO. 91-1996 TYPE II CR-15 PETER AND CONNIE FISH OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE 6 NEWCOMB STREET, OFF MAIN STREET, YELLOW HOUSE ON WEST SIDE OF NEWCOMB APPLICANTS ARE PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE NEW ADDITIONS WOULD NOT CONFORM TO THE SETBACKS OF THE CR-15 ZONING DISTRICT. RELIEF IS BEING REQUESTED FROM THE SETBACKS CONTAINED IN SECTION 179-24C. TAX MAP NO. 130-1-9, 10 LOT SIZE: 0.50 ACRES, 0.32 ACRES SECTION 179-24C CONNIE FISH, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 91-1996, Peter and Connie Fish, Meeting Date: October 16, 1996 "APPLICANT: Peter & Connie Fish PROJECT LOCATION: 6 Newcomb Street Proposed Project and Conformance with the Ordinance: The applicant is proposing to construct additions to an existing home. The two new additions would not conform to the setbacks of the CR-15 zone. Relief is being requested from the setbacks listed in Section 179-24C. criteria for considering an Area Variance, according to Chapter 267, Town Law. 1. Benefit to the applicant: Relief would allow the applicant to construct additions to an existing home. 2. Feasible alternatives: The width of this lot and the location of the existing home make it difficult to construct additions that would not require setback relief. 3. Is this relief substantial relative to the ordinance? At the front lot line, the applicant is seeking 16 feet of front yard setback relief. The applicant is also requesting new side setbacks of 13 and 17 feet. 4. Effects on the neighborhood or community? No negative impacts are expected with this application for relief. 5. Is this difficulty self created? The difficulty arises from the width of the lot and placement of the existing home at this location. Staff Comments & Concerns: This application for two additions also includes a proposal to remove a portion of an existing shed. This removal will result in an improved side setback for the shed. The - 32 - --' --' (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) additions would be in character with the building setbacks at the other locations in this area. Permeability standards for the CR-15 district will be met under this expansion. SEQR: Type II, no further action required." MR. THOMAS-And nothing from Warren County. Would you like to add anything to the application? MRS. FISH-Other than over the five years we've made great improvements on our property. My name is Connie Fish. This is my silent partner, Pete. He just pays for everything I do. Our first summer there, I mean, just yard debris. When we first moved in, I had to say I was shocked, but we took 22 truck loads, dump truck loads, out of the yard, alone, planted several flower beds, numerous trees, and have cleared the back lot somewhat, to make a play area for my children, and I know we kind of did it backwards, working from the outside ill, but that just happened to be the way things fell. Also, getting our yard set to move the septic tank, which has already been done, a new main water line is being put in, hopefully this week, and just trying to set the property up for the changes in the home. That's basically it. My family's grown since we've moved in. MR. THOMAS-Any questions from the Board? MR. MENTER-Could you describe the changes, looking at the map that we have here? MRS. FISH-The changes in the home itself? MR. MENTER-Yes, exactly what you're going to be doing there. MRS. FISH-There's an existing side porch there. That is very rotted. It actually needs to be removed one way or another. It's going to become a hazard, and we're just going to re-build that, as it is, but it will be a little shorter in length. It'll be the same width, and there is an attached shed to the back of the home that must have been an afterthought of the previous tenant. There's no foundation under that. It's wood sitting on the ground. That also needs to come off, so that that would be removed also, and in place of that, it would be a 20, the same width as the home, and 20 feet deep in the lot, two bedrooms. So it's just improving, those are the two worst features of the house, and make more room for the children and ourselves. MRS. LAPHAM-I don't see where the shed part is. I see the porch. Is it where it says "wood ramp"? MRS. FISH-Yes. The ramp has since been removed. MR. THOMAS-Okay, but that's where that shed that you were just mentioning. MRS. LAPHAM-Where is the shed that you're referring to? I don't see that. MRS. FISH-Right to the left of where it says the wooden ramp. That's an attached shed. It's attached to the back of the home. There's no access there from inside the home. That's only got an exterior access. MRS. LAPHAM-Okay. MR. O'LEARY-So would the south side of the house just be one clean line? MRS. FISH-Yes. - 33 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. STONE-You were also talking about removing the little appendage on the frame shell? MRS. FISH-Right. That serves no purpose. It's just sitting almost right on the property line, and while the contractor's there taking debris away, he'll take that away also. MR. THOMAS-Does anyone else have questions? public hearing. I'll open up the PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. FISH-I've got a letter from one of my neighbors. I don't know if that matters or not, that was good enough to send. MR. THOMAS-I'll have Bonnie read it in when it comes to the Correspondence end of it. MRS. FISH-Okay. MR. THOMAS-Anyone in favor of this application? Anyone opposed to the application? Anyone wishing to speak on any part of this? Do we have any correspondence in the folder? MRS. LAPHAM-No. MR. THOMAS-We'll read this one in. MRS. LAPHAM-Oct6ber 16, 1996, Mr. Christian G. Thomas, "This letter is pertaining to the hearing on the addition to the single family home at 6 Newcomb Street in Queensbury. We are not able to attend this meeting but would like for the Board to hear our opinion. The addition to this house would only effect our property, not anyone else on the street. The addition that is proposed is not going to be any further out than the main part of the house that is already existing. We have never had any problems with this and can see no reason why we would have any problems now. We give our full consent for Peter and Connie Fish to put their addition onto their house. If you would like to contact us for any further comments or questions, please feel free to call us. Our phone number is 793- 1457. Sincerely, Richard Finch, Jr. and Jeannette Finch 4 Newcomb Street, Queensbury" MR. THOMAS-That's it? MRS. LAPHAM-Yes, that's it. MR. THOMAS-I'll close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. THOMAS-Anymore questions for the applicant from the Board members? I'll start with Dave. What do you think? MR. MENTER-Well, in my mind, they met all the criteria. They're not going to be increasing, or they're not going to be decreasing either front or side setbacks, and will, in fact, be removing some overall footprint on the property. I don't see any negative effect at all. I think it's a fine project. MR. THOMAS-Bob? MR. KARPELES-Well, if they want to expand their place, I don't see where they have any choice but to do what they're doing, and when I went out there to visit, luckily Mrs. Fish was there and she explained it to me in detail, and I think it's a plus, a real plus. I have no objection whatsoever. - 34 - "'--" -...-"- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. THOMAS-Bonnie? MR. LAPHAM-I have no objection. I think they definitely need more room. MR. THOMAS-Lou? MR. STONE-No objection whatsoever. Mrs. Fish was also kind to me. She went out to get the mail, and I happened to drive up, and I did get a full explanation, and it's perfectly fine to me. MR. THOMAS-Don? MR. O'LEARY-No problem. MR. THOMAS-Bill? MR. GREEN-I can't see anything wrong with this. MR. THOMAS-I concur with the rest of the Board members, that I think this is a good project. I think it will enhance the neighborhood, and I think it will give the Fishs a little more room to live. The only question I have, it says you're going to put in two bedrooms, one up and one down. MRS. FISH-Correct. MR. THOMAS-Is that a first and a second story? MRS. FISH-Right now it's a single story home, but the addition will be, a story and a half. I guess, in the upstairs bedroom you will still have the slanted ceilings. MR. THOMAS-Will it be just as high as the existing house? MRS. FISH-It will be higher. MR. THOMAS-How much higher? MRS. FISH-I would say four foot. MR. THOMAS-About four foot above the existing roof line, along the same? MRS. FISH-The same pitch. MR. THOMAS-The same ridge? MRS. FISH-Yes. MR. THOMAS-Perpendicular to the road? MRS. FISH-Yes. MR. THOMAS-I was out there, but it was Sunday morning and I just drove by. I was in a hurry. Having said that, I'm looking for a motion. MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 91-1996 PETER AND CONNIE FISH, Introduced by Louis Stone who moved for its adoption, seconded by Bonnie Lapham: The applicant is proposing to construct additions to an existing home. The two new additions would not conform with the setbacks of the CR-15 zone and relief is being requested. In addition, at the same time, the Fish's are agreeing to take down a shed which will improve the setback of a secondary building on the property. The benefit to the applicant, relief would allow the applicant to - 35 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) construct additions to an existing home and conformity to the current design. There really are no other feasible alternatives that exist that would not violate, in one way, shape or form, the setback requirements. The relief is substantial relative to the Ordinance, but the house, it doesn't really change the current setback of the existing structure. No negative impacts are expected with this application on the neighborhood. The difficulty is self created only in the fact that they own an existing home on this property, and its current placement. The applicant is seeking 16 feet of front yard setback relief, and requesting new side setbacks of 13 and 17 feet, and the requirement on the side setbacks is 20. So seven and three feet, and on the front is 50 feet, so 16 feet from the current existing 50 foot requirement. Duly adopted this 16th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. O'Leary, Mr. Green, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mrs. Lapham, Mr. Stone, Mr. Thomas NOES: NONE MR. THOMAS-Application is granted. Go ahead and start building. MRS. FISH-Okay. Thank you. MR. THOMAS-Make sure you get your building permit first. MRS. FISH-Thank you. AREA VARIANCE NO. 88-1996 TYPE II WR-1A/CEA TORREN L. MOORE OWNER: ARTHUR AND JILL SPIERRE WEST SIDE OF PILOT KNOB ROAD, APPROX. 1/4 MILE NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH ROUTE 9L APPLICANT PROPOSES TO RECONSTRUCT AN EXISTING BOATHOUSE BY INCLUDING A STORAGE ROOM AND DECK. THE RECONSTRUCTED BOATHOUSE WOULD NOT CONFORM TO THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS FOR BOATHOUSES CONTAINED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. RELIEF IS BEING REQUESTED FROM THE BOATHOUSE REGULATIONS LISTED IN SECTION 179-60B,5,b,10. CROSS REF. SPR 62-96 ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY WARREN COUNTY PLANNING 10/9/96 TAX MAP NO. 19-1-18 LOT SIZE: 0.49 ACRES SECTION 179-60B,5,b,10 TORREN MOORE, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 88-1996, Torren L. Moore, Meeting Date: October 16, 1996 "APPLICANT: Torren Moore PROJECT LOCATION: Pilot Knob Rd. Proposed Project and Conformance with the Ordinance: The applicant proposes to remodel an existing boathouse on Pilot Knob Rd. The remodeled boathouse would contain a new deck and storage area. The height of the new structure would not change, however the area of the boathouse would increase due to a change in the pitch of the roof. The applicant proposes to maintain the height of the boathouse in order to use the structure as a storage area for cars and boats. Criteria for consider an Area Variance, according to Chapter 267, Town Law: 1. Benefit to applicant: Relief would allow the applicant to remodel an existing boathouse in order to store cars and boats, as well as constructing a new deck and storage area. 2. Feasible a1 ternati ves: The applicant may be able to remodel the interior of the existing structure and use the existing structure without altering the exterior of the boathouse. 3. Is this relief substantial relative to the ordinance? The applicant is seeking a 19 foot 8 inch height for this boathouse. Boathouses with peaked roofs are limited to 18 feet by the Zoning Ordinance. 4. Effects on the neighborhood or community? The additional building area that will result from the change in the roof pitch may reduce lake views from surrounding properties. Other comment may be made at the public hearing. 5. Is this difficulty self created? The difficulty arises from the - 36 - -< (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) desire of the applicant to remodel an existing boathouse which does not conform to the height restrictions in the Zoning Ordinance. Staff Comments &: Concerns: The ZBA may wish to examine the possibility that the applicant could remodel the interior of this boathouse. This would allow the applicant to use the existing structure and not impact lake views from surrounding properties. SEQR: Type II, no further action required." MRS. LAPHAM-II At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board, held on the 9th day of October 1996, the above application for an Area Variance to reconstruct an existinq boathouse by includinq a storaqe room and deck. was reviewed and the following action was taken. Recommendation to: No County Impact. II Signed by C. Powel South, Chairperson. MR. THOMAS-Would you like to add anything to your application? MR. MOORE-Not at this time. MR. THOMAS-Okay. MR. GORALSKI-Could you just state your name for the record. MR. MOORE-My name is Torren Moore. MR. THOMAS-I see, Mr. Moore, you're the project applicant, but you're not the property owner. Are you in the process of buying this property, or do you own it or do you have a piece of the action? MR. MOORE-I have a contract on the house, with the contingency that a building permit would be obtained. MR. THOMAS-For this structure. Yes. Okay. Any questions from the Board for the applicant? MR. KARPELES-Yes. I just want to be clear. If this were one foot eight inches lower, he wouldn't even be before us? Is that right? MR. GORALSKI-Correct. MR. KARPELES-So the obvious question is, why can't you lower it one foot eight inches? MR. MOORE-Lower the current structure? MR. KARPELES-Yes. MR. MOORE-Well, it's a peaked roof. MR. KARPELES-Yes, I know, but it's 19 feet 8 inches now, and you want to keep it 19 feet 8 inches? MR. MOORE-Right. Exactly. MR. KARPELES-If you made it 18 feet, you wouldn't even have to come before us. Why can't you make it, since you're modifying it anyway, why can't you make it 18 feet? MR. MOORE-Well, we have to take the entire roof off to put the deck on, anyway, and if you lower it to 18 feet, you're going to have only a three foot or three and a half foot headroom, above the deck, which wouldn't allow for very much usable space above the deck. MR. THOMAS-Well, since you're going to be taking the roof off, is there any way you can lower the deck down the 20 inches it would take? - 37 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. MOORE-And the only way to do that would be to lower the sill, which, the problem here is created that the boathouse was built in 1917, and Pilot Knob Road, at that point, was four feet lower than it is today. When they reconstructed Pilot Knob Road, evidentally they raised up four feet, and the entire boathouse, at that point, had to be raised up four feet. So this is the same height that the boathouse has been since 1917. There's a garage portion of it and a boat portion of it. The garage portion was built at the level of Pilot Knob Road. So in order to lower the sill, to bring the roof line down two feet, you'd end up with a five and a half foot garage instead of a seven and a half or eight foot garage, because it's built, again, with the garage side on Pilot Knob Road. MR. KARPELES-I don't follow that, because you're changing the pitch of the roof. MR. MOORE-Okay. I'm sorry. How can I clear it for you? MR. KARPELES-I don't know. I just don't understand it, because you're concerned about the garage. The roof is still over both the boathouse and the garage, right? MR. MOORE-That's right. MR. KARPELES-Okay. So the height at this point, and the height at this point. MR. MOORE-But if you look at the picture above, we're going to have to raise the flooring up in order to gain a pitch on the flat part of the deck. We want to make that consistent, as it runs into the covered part. MR. KARPELES-But that isn't going to bother the height of your garage? MR. MOORE-No, that's right. MR. KARPELES-Okay. MR. MOORE-But if you measure down, to keep within Code compliance from the 18 feet down to where the roof line would be, you'd only have about a three and a half foot or four foot area to be able to go into. MR. KARPELES-Well, that's just storage area anyway, isn't it? MR. MOORE-Well, it's a storage area and a place to be able to go and, you know, if it rains and you want to get out of the sun for a period of time, yes. MR. O'LEARY-What's the head room planned under the existing plan? What is the head room in the storage area? MR. MOORE-Under the plan? I believe it comes out to about seven feet. I'm sorry. That's probably not right. Five and a half feet. I can measure it. MR. O'LEARY-Probably, because you're down to three and a half if you lose that 20 inches. MR. MOORE-You'd have to crawl in or you'd have to, yes. MR. STONE-A question for Staff. John, this is a combination boathouse and garage. Are the requirements the same for boat? MR. GORALSKI-He's calling it a combination boathouse and garage. The Zoning Ordinance considers it a boathouse, period. - 38 - ~' (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. STONE-Okay. MR. MOORE-But there's a garage portion of it clearly off the road, with a garage door on it, a place to park your vehicle. MR. STONE-What is that structure that extends well above the roof, that is affixed to the building itself? MR. MOORE-That's some sort of a mast removal. down. That would come MR. STONE-That would come down? MR. MOORE-Absolutely. MR. GREEN-It must have been for a sailboat? MR. MOORE-A sailboat, yes. MR. GREEN-Which is no longer there. MR. THOMAS-My math says that at the peak of that roof, of the proposed covered part, comes up to eight feet, one inch. Is that right? Because what I did was took nineteen feet eight inches, subtracted ten feet five inches, one foot two inches, and four feet six inches. MR. MOORE-If you look at the proposed, the peak wou¡d actually be six feet. MR. MENTER-A little more than that, but inside, if you're talking about inside dimension. MR. MOORE-Inside, based on the floor, if you look up, there are six squares, which would equate to six feet at the peak, and about four and a half or five feet to the knee walls. MR. STONE-Does this require Park Commission? MR. MOORE-Yes, it does. Commission. I have an application in to the Park MR. O'LEARY-Would you say that under the remodeling plan as it exists you're going to redo the roof but keep the same pitch, but the old roof would be redone, or just lifted and put back down? MR. MOORE-No. On the remodeling plan, I'm going to change the pitch of the roof to make it less severe, to give more headroom. MR. O'LEARY-But keep the same height? MR. MOORE-The same height, the same maximum height. MR. O'LEARY-But the existing roof will disappear? MR. MOORE-Yes. MR. O'LEARY-And the new roof with a different pitch, at the same height, will take its place? MR. MOORE-Exactly. MR. STONE-And it'll only be one third of the building? MR. MOORE-One third, the back third of the building facing the road. MR. THOMAS-John, did the Town Board change the Waterfront - 39 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) Residential? They passed that a week ago last Monday? MR. GORALSKI-Yes. MR. THOMAS-Did they change the height of boat, was boathouses involved in that? MR. GORALSKI-No. MR. THOMAS-As an accessory structure? MR. GORALSKI-No. Boathouses were not changed. The only change to docks and boathouses was that a dock that is not covered or has any type of boathouse involved and it doesn't require site plan review anymore. The height restrictions and the setbacks all remain the same. MR. THOMAS-Okay. I just wanted to make sure. MR. GORALSKI-I'm adding this up and I'm getting eight feet one inch minus the depth of the rafters, as the head room on the second floor. MR. MOORE-On the proposed? I have six feet. MR. GORALSKI-I'm subtracting 19 feet, 8 inches. I'm subtracting 10 feet, 5 inches, and 1 foot, two inches. MR. MOORE-That's right. You have to add in the thickness of the roof, and then the deck on top of it. MR. GORALSKI-Well, the deck is the one foot two inches. MR. MOORE-Can I come over there for a second? MR. GORALSKI-Sure. I'm taking 19'8", and subtracting 10 foot 5 inches and one foot two inches, at the second floor deck, right. That equals eight feet one inch, and then you'd subtract whatever the depth of your rafter and your roof deck is. MR. MOORE-I've got 4'6" left to here. MR. GORALSKI-Right. MR. MOORE-But I'm counting from here to here. MR. GORALSKI-I'm saying that this dimension here, from the peak to this line here, is eight feet one inch. MR. THOMAS-It doesn't look like that 10 foot five inches comes off the same place, the high water mark. MR. GORALSKI-Where is the 10 foot five inches coming off of? MR. MOORE-It's the same as the 19 foot eight inches. MR. MENTER-Yes, you know, you're right. different spot. MR. MOORE-The 10 foot five inches comes off the platform. That is coming off a MR. GORALSKI-Okay. All right. Well, there's a difference. MR. STONE-So you're going to, and I know this is a question the Park Commission will ask you, if you stand behind the house on the rocks over there, you are going to obscure more of the opposing shore than the current building, because it would be a lower pitch. - 40 - ",,- -' (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. MOORE-Well, the houses are well above. They're 60 feet in the air. MR. STONE-I meant from an observation point. I just know that's a question that's asked by the Park Commission. In other words, you've got a (lost word) roof. So therefore you're this way. So you've encroached on the open space. MR. MOORE-I guess you could consider that a slight encroachment, but on the other hand, we're taking two thirds of the dock off. So anything but a direct behind angle is actually going to open it up. MR. STONE-Okay. MR. THOMAS-Any other questions for the applicant? open the public hearing. I f not, I ' 11 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. THOMAS-Any correspondence? MRS. LAPHAM-No. MR. THOMAS-AnymOre questions for the applicant? MR. MOORE-The neighbor that would be most effected by any kind of an obstruction of view said that he did send in, obviously you don't have it, but he did send in a response saying that he has absolutely no objection and actually would favor taking the current roof down, and replacing it and opening up the front. MR. THOMAS-No, we didn't get anything. MR. MOORE-Maybe it didn't get here yet. MR. THOMAS-Well, lets see, who am I going to start with, Bob this time, right? What do you think? MR. KARPELES~I think that there's a way that this could be built and he could have everything he wanted and still be within the 18 foot height. So I really don't think he needs a variance. I'm opposed to it. MR. MOORE-How could that be done? MR. KARPELES-Well, I don't think we're obligated to give you room to stand up in a storage area, and you could lower the height over the boathouse, couldn't you, lower the height over the boathouse and give yourself more room up above? MR. MOORE-Well, it's all built on the same frame. MR. KARPELES-Well, you're knocking a good share of that off anyway, in order to put the deck up there, aren't you? MR. MOORE-But in order to lower it, then you would lose the height or the head room on the left hand side which is built to the road level. You didn't see inside the boathouse, but as you pull in from road level, that is about a seven, seven and a half foot head room, to the rafters. MR. GREEN-You do have, it says an eight foot overhead door existing, a minimum of eight feet. - 41 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. MOORE-All right. So it's eight feet. If you lower that down, you'd be at the six foot. MR. THOMAS-Bonnie? MRS. LAPHAM-I don't have any questions at this point. MR. MOORE- If you look at the, I'm sorry, I didn' t mean to interrupt. If you look at the scale, again, for the opening, it is a six foot six door that's there now. MR. GREEN-On the boathouse side? MR. MOORE-On the road side. It's a pulled back door that, again, it's a parking spot for a car. MR. KARPELES-Yes, but the door doesn't go up all the way to the roof of the garage? MR. MOORE-Right. MR. GREEN-Are you saying this is your road side elevation? MR. MOORE-Yes. MR. GREEN-And on your next page, it does say eight foot overhead door existing. If that sliding door was eight feet, I stood today, it was well above my head. Your garage side door is an eight foot door. MR. MOORE-Okay. MR. GREEN-I remember looking up at it, the hinges on it, and wonder when's the last time a car was in there. MR. MOORE-I do put my car in there. MR. THOMAS-Bonnie? MRS. LAPHAM-I don't have any questions. I'm going to abstain on this one because I did not have opportunity to visit this site. So I really don't feel qualified to vote on it. MR. THOMAS-Okay. Lou? MR. STONE-I do have a question, as I look at this proposed elevation. This is a stair between the wall and the road? MR. MOORE-No. It's on the lake side. MR. STONE-That's on the lake side? MR. MOORE-Yes. MR. STONE-Okay. So that proposed elevation that I'm looking at is from the lake side. The top one and the bottom ones, the existing is from, that's from the lake side, too? MR. MOORE-Yes, that's the lake side. MR. GREEN-You actually don't have a road side elevation. MR. MOORE-Both of those are, it's meant to show what's there now and what's proposed. MR. STONE-That's lake side? MR. MOORE-Right. It's meant to show what's there and what's - 42 - ~ (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) proposed, and the fact that we're not asking for any additional height consideration. the picture shows two doors on the lake side. MR. STONE-But MR. MOORE-No. MR. GREEN-No. That's just a wall. MR. STONE-That's a wall. I didn' t look at it. My concern is that, I think as Bob said, I think there's a possibility, if you're remodeling, you're not limited to anything except the ,footprint, and I think there's a way of getting what you're trYlng to get within the 18 feet. I'm just concerned that, particularly with the interest that the Town has just expressed in Waterfront zoning by proposing and adopting a new law, even though it doesn't effect this particular thing, I would like to see something done within the 18 feet. MR. MOORE-When I met with the Planning Staff, one option would be to just simply leave the existing roof and remove the two thirds of it, which my understanding would be it doesn't require a variance. MR. GORALSKI-That's correct. MR. MOORE-So, I mean, that would give me less head room, and that would not accomplish, I don't think that's a, still leave the same height, if you will. MR. STONE-Use the same height, but it wouldn't encroach upon the view, that is one of the concerns expressed by Staff. MR. MOORE-Right. The view encroachment is simply the difference between the pitch of the roof and again we're on Pilot Knob Road with a ridge behind it. There is no view. The only neighbor who would possibly be looking at the changed pitch, has indicated there wasn't any problem. MR. STONE-What always comes up, as you may have heard earlier tonight, is you're one, but there may be two, three or four more who want to do similar things, and we have to be very careful when we consider variances. MR. MOORE-And as a future home owner there, I couldn't agree more. Again, we're not trying to ask for more height than that's there. The additional pitch was the minimal to anybody's view. The whole front two thirds will actually be lower. It would aesthetically add to, certainly to the waterfront view of it, and certainly to the back end view of it as well. A boathouse 80 feet to the east of it is already 10 foot higher than the 19' 8" . So, while I realize that doesn't really matter, when you place it in that area, on the road with the ridge behind it, that slight difference in pitch of the roof, or the amount of available that it's going to provide seems like an insignificant approval. MR. STONE-It took you two minutes to explain that it doesn't have much effect, and that's a problem that we get into, because somebody will come up and say, well, take longer and say the same thing, and we have to say, well, we did it for you. It's my concern, I'm listening to the rest of my Board members. MR. THOMAS-Don? MR. O'LEARY-Well, I agree with the members of the Board who have made the observation that it would seem to be not too difficult a task to make the storage space a little bit smaller and adhere to the requirements of the 18 overall. However, having said that, I, personally, think that that is outweighed by, as you've pointed - 43 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) out, the aesthetics on the remodeling, the fact that it's been sitting there at that height for a good number of years, and the fact that the only person who might be hampered by the view has already indicated, as we received by a letter, that it's not a problem for him, and also that it appears to be relatively minimum relief at 20 inches. MR. THOMAS-Bill? MR. GREEN-John, you said he can basically take off the front there and leave that roof and board up the end of it with no variance needed? MR. GORALSKI-Correct. If you mean he could take the lake shore side off and just build a deck, he could do that without a variance, yes. MR. GREEN-Are you going to be doing anything to the exterior of the lower part of this building? MR. MOORE-No. MR. GREEN-I guess I think we could, as a number of people have said, if we're going to re-do it, then lets re-do it right, or leave it alone, but again, I think the probable overall appearance of the structure may be improved. I'm not sure if that outweighs. MR. MOORE-By leaving the existing pitch of the roof and building and a deck up to it, it's going to look very awkward. MR. GREEN-That's what I'm trying to weigh. I think it's going to look a little weird anyway. You'll have a big deck and this little extra piece jetting up there in the sky to begin with. I'd almost like to see it one slant roof running off the back side, but that's not here or there. I'm not sure what I want to do. MR. MOORE-By building the deck and then building it into the back, by having those edges, will, I think, provide a much nicer and cleaner flow and either leaving the existing roof or rebuilding it. MR. MENTER-I see what you're trying to do. I think it makes sense in terms of, if you look solely at the building, but I think that raising the eaves essentially somewhere in the area of six feet, you know, is a substantial increase. MR. MOORE-Well, we're not raising the eaves. We're leaving the bottom of the eaves at the same height. I need to raise them because I need to develop a pitch at the sub roof level, and then I need to add a deck level on top of it. So that one foot two inches it on top of the existing eaves that there. I'm not asking to raise the roof line. I hope I didn't mislead anyone. MR. MENTER-No. The peak is staying in the same location? MR. MOORE-The peak is staying the same height. MR. MENTER-The eaves. MR. MOORE-The eaves are the same height. MR. MENTER-Then how can the pitch change? MR. MOORE-I'm sorry, that eaves. MR. MENTER-Yes, I'm talking about the lower. - 44 - '--' -- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. MOORE-I'm talking about those joists that go across, ceiling joists are going to be at the same height that they are now. MR. MENTER-Right. So the second floor is the same. MR. MOORE-So I basically need to pick up enough room to put a roof in and a deck on top, and by leaving the existing pitch on the current roof and doing that, it just makes a very small are~. MR. MENTER-No, I understand, structurally, what you're doing, but it just seems to me that, in my mind, you would need more cause or more justification, even though you're only doing it for a third of the surface area of the second floor. From that, I'm not sure which direction it is, but from the road side, you are raising the eaves somewhere in the area of six feet. So you're pretty dramatically increasing the obstruction of view from that side. You're changing the structure considerably, and for me, in 10Qking at granting a variance for height, even though the overall height is staying the same, okay, I would be looking to , given the opportunity, improve in some way the overall effect on the area from the building. MR. MOORE-I really thought that's what I was trying to do. I was trying to improve it by making it fit well within the structure. MR. MENTER-I understand what you're saying there, but looking at it, and I can see that to a certain extent, if you get off the straight line of sight. MR. MOORE-And by the way, my house would be the one in the straight line. MR. MENTER-Right, but you know, I'm just saying that it is a substantial change, and you're raising those quite a bit. So by the way I judge criteria, I don't think I could go along with it. MR. STONE-Mr. Chairman, I have a question of Staff. There is a little topping on the roof. Is that above the 19'8" now, the cupola? MR. MOORE-Yes, it is. MR. GORALSKI-It's above the ridge, yes. MR. STONE-It's above the ridge, but where's the height? Does that count as height? MR. GORALSKI-It does, yes. MR. STONE-So it's more than 19'8". MR. GORALSKI-Yes. MR. MOORE-If you take into account the little, whatever you call it on the top, it would be another two and a half to three feet, yes. MR. STONE-That won't be on the new one? MR. MOORE-That won't be on the new one. MR. GREEN-I've made up my mind. After sitting here and listening to the other members, I kind of had a flash. Based upon the way I would interpret the criteria, benefit to you versus detriment to the neighborhood, I think is the big stickler here. With that rock ledge directly behind the building, the home considerably higher than the boathouse, any view coming or going up and down the road, unless you're, again, directly behind the boathouse, is going to be - 45 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) improved, and then when you are directly behind the boathouse at road level, you can't see anyway. I don't think a foot eight is really substantial to the Ordinance, seeing as how it's there already. So my flash is I've decided this is a pretty good idea. MR. THOMAS-You must be psychic, Bill, because that's what I wrote down, benefit to the applicant versus detriment to the neighborhood. It would be more of a benefit to the applicant than it would be a detriment to the neighborhood. It stays the same height. It's an improvement to what's there. Like Bill says, when you drive by, you can't see the part above it. I mean, you're going to be looking, when you drive by it, the same thing that's there now, unless you drive looking up in the air, and on the Pilot Knob Road, you don't do that. MR. MOORE-Not when you're doing 50. MR. THOMAS-It's marked 30. MR. STONE-While I was parked there I thought guys were whizzing by me. MR. MOORE-It's unbelievable. MR. MENTER-Actually, to support your argument, not mine but yours, if someone's going to make a motion, you can also include that he's going to be lowering the overall height, lower that overall height, whatever the size of that thing is. MR. THOMAS-Yes. That's true, too, plus he's lowering the overall height, two thirds of the overall height, by taking off the front two thirds. So any of the other Board members have anything they want to state before I ask for a motion? All right. I'll ask for the motion. MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 88-1996 TORREN L. MOORE, Introduced by Donald O'Leary who moved for its adoption, seconded by William Green: Approving the remodeling of existing boathouse, which under current requirements would not meet the overall height restriction which would be 18 feet. Current remodeling would maintain existing 19 feet eight inches, thereby requesting relief of 20 inches from the existing requirements. The benefit to the applicant would be the expansion and the increased space and use of the existing boathouse combination garage, with no apparent detriment to the existing area, no public comment to that effect, and some public comment to the effect that it would be considered an improvement to the area. The difficulty is self created. The boathouse does exist at 19 feet eight inches, and the applicant would like to keep that at 19 feet eight inches, and the difficulty is that the Ordinance states it's 18 feet. That the applicant agrees to remove the mast, the demasting equipment or the masting equipment, and that the existing additional cupola will not be replaced on the roof. That the eaves height of the new structure not to exceed 16 feet one inch from the existing dock, and that the front two thirds of the existing, or the lakeshore two thirds of the existing roof area is going to be removed. Duly adopted this 16th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Green, Mr. Stone, Mr. O'Leary, Mr. Thomas NOES: Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles ABSTAINED: Mrs. Lapham - 46 - '-'" '- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. THOMAS-That's a four to two. So it's passed, with the restrictions that are in the motion. That the cupola comes off, the mast equipment comes off, and no more than 16 feet 1 inch above the. MR. MOORE-Does that add up to? MR. GORALSKI-That's what this adds up to here. MR. MOORE-That's to the bottom of the eaves? MR. GORALSKI-Right. MR. MOORE-Off the dock. MR. GORALSKI-Off the dock, correct. The 19 feet 8 inches is from the high water mark. The 16 feet is from the dock. MR. MOORE-Right, and what I'm going to do is I'm going to measure that from where it exists today. That's the easiest way for me to do it because on the back, the road side, that's going to be different than 19'8", but where it is today is where it's going to start. MR. GORALSKI-Right. Yes. MR. MOORE-Thank you. USE VARIANCE NO. 94 -1996 TYPE: UNLISTED LI -lA JAMES C. KISLOWSKI OWNER: JACK LEBOWITZ SOUTH SIDE OF CORINTH ROAD, JUST TO THE WEST OF PINELLO ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO OPERATE A RETAIL SHOWROOM FOR MOTORCYCLES, SKI -DOOS, AND OTHER SMALL MOTORIZED PRODUCTS; RELATED RETAIL APPAREL; SERVICE SHOP AND PARTS AND ACCESSORIES SALES. THE PROPOSED USES ARE NOT PERMITTED USES UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING DESIGNATION, LI-1A. RELIEF IS BEING REQUESTED FROM THE USES ALLOWED IN SECTION 179-26. CROSS REF. SPR 69-96 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING 10/9/96 TAX MAP NO. 147-1-1.1, 1.2 LOT SIZE: 1.30 ACRES, 0.44 ACRES SECTION 179-26 MARK LEVACK, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Use Variance No. 94-1996, James C. Kislowski, Meeting Date: October 16, 1996 "APPLICANT: James Kislowski PROJECT LOCATION: Corinth Rd. PROPOSED PROJECT AND CONFORMANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE: The applicant is proposing to operate a retail showroom for motorcycles, ski-doos, and other small motorized products; related retail apparel; service shop and parts and accessories sales. The proposed uses are not permitted uses under the current zoning designation of LI-1A. Relief is being requested from the use schedule in Section 179-26 in order to allow the above mentioned uses. REVIEW CRITERIA, BASED ON SECTION 267-b OF THE TOWN LAW: 1. IS A REASONABLE RETURN POSSIBLE IF THE LAND IS USED AS ZONED? The board should consider whether or not the financial information that has been provided is sufficient enough to indicate that a reasonable return is not possible at this location. 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 is located among a group of parcels on the south side of Corinth Rd. which are zoned LI-1A. The properties on the north side of Corinth Rd. are also zoned LI-1A. It appears that development conditions for the lot seeking a use variance are the same as other properties in the area. 3. IS THERE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD? The sales and servicing of motorcycles at this location may produce some noise impacts on residential neighborhoods to the south. The propose use could also lead to - 47 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) future requests for commercial development along this area of Corinth Rd. 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? The ZBA should determine if this property can be used for one or more of the allowed uses in the LI-1A district. STAFF COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: As is the case with all Use Variance applications, the applicant is required to meet all criteria in order to be approved. The ZBA should determine if all these criteria have been met before taking final action on this application. SEQR: Type Unlisted, short EAF attached." MRS. LAPHAM- "At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board, held on the 9th day of October 1996, the above application for a Use Variance to operate a retail showroom for motorcycles, ski-doos, and other small motorized products; related retail apparel; service shop and parts and accessories sales. was reviewed and the following action was taken. Recommendation to: No County Impact" Signed by C. Powel South, Chairperson. MR. THOMAS-All right. Mr. Levack, you're up. MR. LEVACK-Good evening. My name's Mark Levack. I'm an agent here this 2vening for Jack Lebowitz and Jim Kislowski. JIM KISLOWSKI MR. KISLOWSKI-Jim Kislowski. MR. LEVACK-For the record. I'd like to basically apologize for the size of our presentation maps this evening. They're really quite small. So if some of these homeowners here aren't able to see this map, we'd encourage you to come up and look at it and get nice and close because we'd like to get specific on what we're going to be doing here this evening. I have a list of arguments that I'd like to make or cases or causes, in no particular order, but I think that each one of these has a certain amount of merit and should be brought out onto the table, just so that we get everything out in the open and there isn't any questions or confusion as to what the applicant here this evening wants to do. As 1- said, he's Jim Kislowski and he has a business that he would like to relocate from Schenectady. He has relocated it from Schenectady because the space that he was in was leased to another person that really had to move in quite a hurry. We believe that we can demonstrate the need for a Use Variance here this evening, through the competent financial means, and that we'd also like to say that we think we can demonstrate that this relief that's being sought from zoning here this evening is a minimal relief. We're looking to transition, basically, from an area that allows for heavy equipment sales and service to Jim's operation, which is basically light equipment sales and service. I'd like to point out that there are currently a whole list of properties on the Corinth Road corridor that are in a light industrial zone and we feel that they're obvicµsly a more intensive operation than Jim's operation would present at this particular location. The Logger's Equipment Supply, Northern Distributing, Webb Graphics, West Side Auto, C & D Auto, the former West Mountain Tractor Sales Building, right across the street, is zoned light industrial, and they were working on Catapillar engines and I would venture to say that the noise generated from that shop was certainly a lot more intensive than this operation intends to be. You have Raven Industries in that building across the street, and the Glens Falls Kennel Club, which as you may recall I was here asking for a variance because the light industrial zone didn't allow for that commercial operation of a Kennel Club and a variance. I know that at that time a lot of the neighbors concerns was that these dogs are going to be barking and there's going to be noise created here, and to date I think I - 48 - '.-- '-- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) can say, without question, that there hasn't been a single complaint about that in that location that got a Use Variance right across the street. I'd also like to point out that the application was a little bit incorrect in that there's six properties on this site, the way it exists right now, and they were sort of just grouped together, and I think they were added on to and added on to and added on to. So the buildings that exist are six, and I think we said there were four or five. So we stand corrected on that. I'd like to also point out that Jim intends on improving the condition of the property, but not increasing or altering the condition of the property. I had a highlighter here and I had some other maps highlighted. This building up here in the far, what would it be, far northwest corner of property is the only building that Jim intends on using for his operation, and that's the only building that he's leasing from the current property owner, Jack Lebowitz. So I'd like to just highlight this one building right up front here and say that's the only building that he's going to be using. Right now, there's I think a commercial painter is leasing some space in this shop building, and then most of the other buildings Jack Lebowitz is using for storage, and just some of his kitchen products as a use to the building, but it's not generating him any income. Jack came about this property, he was the first mortgage holder with Cattone Kitchens, which unfortunately went out of business, and part of the argument that we need to make here this evening is that there is a financial hardship. This is a closing statement that Jack's attorney, Mark Lebowitz, gave me today, and you can see from this closing statement that Jack is into this property, right now, for I'm going to guess anywhere between $330,000 and $350,000. If you add the taxes that he's been paying on the property for the two years since he's owned it and some maintenance items, I think you could argue that he's into the property for more. He hasn't really done any remodeling to the property, since he ended up taking over the property from the prior owner of the property, which he was the first mortgage holder on. We're here this evening because we've had this property listed for two years and we haven't had a single offer on this space. The property has been in multiple list service as has been evidenced by the listing agreements that I've provided you with here this evening, and before that, Cat tone Kitchens, before they went out of business, knew they were going out of business, and they asked us to try to market the property and find a tenant for them or a buyer for them, and we were unable to do that, as the economy was down cycling and the available list of properties was much larger than the available list of tenants, and the building sat vacant. 80, you know, we're here saying that the hardship is a hardship that's not self created in that the economy has put a flood of space on the market, and my job as a commercial realtor is to go out there and work with tenants like Jim and try to find the highest and best use of these buildings. As it turns out, Jim needed a showroom and a shop, and he needed it almost exactly in this square footage category, and in this location and in this price range. So the building was ideally suited for Jim's operation because it did have a showroom. It was the Futura Flooring showroom, a commercial operation that sold carpeting, flooring, and they had a storage area in the back that was much rougher, and it didn't have showroom capability in the back. 80 the building was a perfect fit for Jim, and we're here before the Board this evening because we got a little bit ahead of ourselves in that we showed Jim the property and he liked it, and we were working to put the deal together and Jim was under an intense time constraint to put his stuff somewhere because he had to re-locate his property. He was asked to vacate his property. So the timing didn't quite work out. We got a little bit ahead of ourselves, and that's why we're here this evening asking you for a Use Variance instead. Jim has made improvement to the property already, but he fully understands that that improvement, as was clearly pointed out by the Town Staff department that any improvement would be done at his own risk because we still had to get over the Use Variance issue. I'd like - 49 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) to say that Jim has painted the trim of the building. He's put flower boxes out on the building. He's improved the landscaping beds, the landscaping, I think some of the improvement that's been done there was purely a cosmetic improvement, but nonetheless an improvement to the property. There was, it's a dirt lot in that property, with the exception of some paved area up in the front of the property. Jim has graded a runoff area that had caused some puddling, some major puddling in that area, he brought up to grade in that area, and he brought in 2200 ton of stone, and basically put more crushed stone down in the area behind on the side entrance that was not paved and that would access his rear loading area to this space. Jim did this in an effort to improve the property, improve the location and make the building aesthetic not only to the neighbors, to himself, but to his customers who he hopes will ultimately, upon the graces of your Use Variance, shop there. I'd like to, again, point out that Jim is making no alterations to the building. The signage that's there and existing is adequate, and he won't be seeking any sign variance. He's going to be using the stantions that are there. He fully intends his operation will be from the hours of eight a.m. to six p.m., and he will be doing no storage of parts or boxes or accessories outdoors. All his part storage, motorcycle storage, will be indoors. His shop area, I know probably some of the comments that I've heard from some of the property owners that are here this evening, as I understand them being mentioned, are primarily concerned about noise, and we all conjure up these images of a motorcycle shop being maybe a haven for bikers or an area that might tend to get a little loud because of the nature of the people that are visiting this site, but to my knowledge, I don't think that Adirondack Power Products or Sportline Honda has complaints of people being noisy, what not. Jim's business is not centered on dirt bikes. It's centered on road bikes, and this is a very, I feel, upscale clientele base. The bikes range anywhere from $15,000 to $25,000. These are not indigent people that are hanging around these places. Jim is a specialty shop and fully intends to meet the needs of the market place in this specialty shop. I think that as it relates to any kind of noise, you know, Jim is an inspection. He's going to be an AMA promoter, and a licensed inspector, and it's his job to go out and make sure that all the motorcycles have mufflers on them, you know, to make sure that they are street worthy and street licensed. So that, Jim, I think, is going to be providing a service not only, you know, for himself and his customers, but for the community as a whole. I know that a concern of some of the people here is this Niagara Mohawk right-of-way, and it's been a dirt bike trail, where the dirt bikes, and certainly we all know that they've been out there. They've been running, and I think the homeowners here could probably address the fact of how current that is or how reoccurring it is and how big a problem it is. I'd like to state here for the record that under no condition is Jim or Jim's customers or employees intending on taking their motorcycles up this Niagara Mohawk right-of-way. It's private property, and he'll be doing everything he can do to eliminate bikers that may be biking that now, through no cause of Jim's, to stop doing that. So certainly there's no goal to use this area for any of Jim's bikers and what not. The buildings have been on the market for three years, as I've said. There've been no offers on the space. I'd also like to point out that Jim is a tenant here in this deal. He's not buying this building. He doesn't intend to make this a long term home of his. He wants to make this location a spring board location, in hopes that he outgrows this location and can afford to move to a Route 9 or a Quaker Road location, although, arguably, Corinth Road is quite a commercial location. I think Jim has some goals down the road. The lease does have provisions that he could be relocated off of this property, not before six months, with 90 days notice. So the property's still for sale. We're still trying to sell the property, and if another deal comes down the road, then Jim could have a short lived window of up to nine months there, but it is a two year lease, and it's a lease that the owner of the - 50 - ~ (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) building very much wants to have because it's clear that Jim is improving the property and it's bringing life back into the property. I'd also make an argument, from a commercial real estate perspective here this evening, that to hurt your property values, I think we can very clearly and calmly address all your concerns here that you may have over Jim's operation and say that they will not affect your property values. They will not effect your quiet enjoyment, but I will say that if we don't get these spaces out there leased in the market place, that the eroding value base and the eroding commercial market base, with these available vacancies, is going to affect everybody's property values a lot more than we'd like to think. So I think we're here this evening with a use that conforms with the location and the building and we can answer any questions that you might have. MR. MENTER-Just to get it clear, Mark, the bottom picture there shows that pie shaped piece included. Is that part of the parcel? MR. LEVACK-I believe it is. I guess I didn't have that highlighted right there, but I believe, John, that's part of the property? I thought it was. MR. GORALSKI-According to this tax map it is. MR. LEVACK - Yes. I'm sorry, I didn' t have it highl ighted right here, but I did have it bold highlighted. So I think that it is part of the property, yes. MR. GORALSKI-Well, actually, no. I'm sorry. According to this tax map, it's showing a property line there. MR. LEVACK-It's not included, John? MR. GORALSKI-According to this tax map. MR. LEVACK-I guess what you're saying is right here, the tax map that the Town came off of their computer with? MR. GORALSKI-Right. It shows a line. MR. LEVACK-It. was confusing to me, too. I think -it is what John is saying. MR. MENTER-Now, one of those buildings is not vacant, the one right behind Jim's. MR. LEVACK-Half of this building is vacant. All of this building is vacant, and I believe that there's some storage right now of some kitchen products in this building, and I don't believe that, this building might have a couple of kitchen items in it as well. MR. STONE-You had a truck parked on the property. permanently parked? Is that MR. LEVACK-Yes. I wish they'd get rid of that. I think that was part of Cat tone Kitchens operation. I don't know why that thing is still there. MR. KARPELES-Well, what are we looking for the variance for, for all those buildings, or just one of those? MR. LEVACK-No, just for this one building. The LI-1A zone allows for heavy equipment sales and service. It doesn't allow for light equipment sales and service and retail and part sales and accessory uses. It may even allow for part sales, John, I don't know. I think, where did we need the relief from zoning, John? I think it was the equipment and the retail, wasn't it, the light equipment and retail? - 51 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. GORALSKI-The whole operation doesn't meet any. MR. LEVACK-It's basically a retail operation in a light industrial zone. I'd also kind of throw out here that you're better dealing with the devil that you know than the devil that you don't know. We could come in next week with a junk yard or an asphalt plant or, John, what are the other listed permitted uses in light industrial that might be, arguably, a little more obj ectionable than a motorcycle sales and service shop? MR. GORALSKI-Well, I don't want to make a quality decision on any of these uses. MR. LEVACK-Yes. MR. O'LEARY-Can I just ask you, you're representing Mr. Lebowitz? MR. LEVACK-I'm representing both, Mr. Kislowski and Mr. Lebowitz. MR. O'LEARY-Right, but it's Mr. Lebowitz who needs the variance. MR. LEVACK-Right, and it runs with the property. So we thought to have the owner of the building seek the relief as opposed to the applicant, it's really the same thing. MR. 0' LEARY-Right, but when we get to the point where we need explanations on what alternatives are there for other financial employment of the property you'll be representing? MR. LEVACK-I can represent Mr. Lebowitz because we are right on the front line in the commercial market place with availability tenant pool out there, and I can tell you that I, personally, we've been handling this building since it came on, and there has not been one offer on this property. It has just sat vacant and therein lies the hardship. MR. KARPELES-Could we get clear on a couple of things that you gave us? This closing statement, is that for the entire property? MR. LEVACK-That's for the entire property, right. MR. KARPELES-Okay, and does that mean that he paid $330,000 for it in 1994. MR. LEVACK-That's correct, when he took the first mortgage back over. MR. KARPELES-And he's trying to sell it for $495,000 and $400,000? MR. LEVACK-I think it was recently reduced to, what, $400,000? MR. KARPELES-Yes. MR. LEVACK-Yes. So he has about that into it and he's trying to recoup what he basically has into it. I think even, you know. MR. KARPELES-$330,000 as opposed to even $400,000 would be a pretty good profit in two years. I mean, I could see why he wouldn't sell it. MR. LEVACK-No. He clearly wants to sell it. After you take out the real estate commissions, the legal fees, the real property gains tax, the New York State Real Property Transfer Tax, and whatever dollars of improvement that he's had to ensure the building and pay the taxes on it, I'm comfortable in saying he would love to get out of it what he has into it and he won't do that. He will not be able to make that, what he has into the property. - 52 - ---' (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. STONE-Did he put the buildings up? MR. LEVACK-I think Cattone's Kitchens may have put the buildings up and he financed them on that possibly. He was the first mortgage holder on the property, and that's how he came to be the owner of the property today, because they defaulted on their mortgage. I might also point out that as far as the noise issues,go, they ~ere running planers and table saws, sanders. It was a kltchen cablnet making operation there, and I don't have any decibel information here that we could probably address at the site plan review stage, but I would argue that Jim's mufflered motorcycles indoors, venting through a corrugated exhaust pipe, are not going to have nearly the noise impact that the prior operation had with the trucks coming in and out of the property. MR. 0' LEARY-Jim, could I ask you, are you going to represent certain manufacturers for sales? MR. KISLOWSKI-I'm trying, right now, to get a franchise right now. I didn't know where I stand with the Town Board. MR. O'LEARY-So when it says retail sales, retail sales of what motorcycles? MR. KISLOWSKI-All different types of motorcycles, all terrain vehicles, watercrafts. MR. O'LEARY-Will they be second hand? They'll be used? MR. KISLOWSKI-Yes, some of them will be, and some of them will be brand new, but they call them leftovers. It will be a brand new model, but a year later. MR. O'LEARY-Where will you get those? Where will they come from? MR. KISLOWSKI-They come from different auctions. They come from different dealers that are selling out their old stock. I go in and buyout all the old stock parts that are outdated from other motorcycle shops. MR. O'LEARY-And no dirt bikes, no trail bikes? MR. KI SLOWSKI - No. We won' t have a race track around there or anything like that. Everything would strictly be dealt with inside. MR. O'LEARY-Are you going to compete directly with motorcycle shops in Town or are they different from you, in that they are new sales? MR. KISLOWSKI-Well, yes. They're brand new sales and brand new, you know, there are service and mainly warranty problems and stuff that they deal with. It would not hurt any of the other businesses. A few of the other businesses I've talked to said it was a good idea because they specialized in a certain type of motorcycle, and they don't really want to work on different types of motorcycles. MR. STONE-Will there be people taking them out for test drives? MR. KISLOWSKI-No, not on the property they won't be. MR. STONE-But on the highway? MR. KISLOWSKI-Yes. MR. STONE-So they've got to start from the parking lot? MR. KISLOWSKI-Right. - 53 - {Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96} MR. THOMAS-Any more questions of the applicant? MR. 0' LEARY-Just one other question. What is the lease arrangement proposal? MR. LEVACK-It's a two year lease, and the landlord has the right to sell the property and ask Jim to vacate the property, not prior to six months, after six months with ninety days notice. So the least amount of time Jim could be in the property is nine months, and the longest amount of time he could be in the property is two years. MRS. LAPHAM-Mark, when you say no offers, do you mean there's been no offers to purchase or no other offers to lease or offers at all? MR. LEVACK-No offers to lease. No offers to purchase. Nothing. MRS. LAPHAM-No offers of any kind in three years? MR. LEVACK-No, and we've stressed offers, even though there might be a $400,000 asking price on the property, that's not a firm asking price, and guaranteed somebody's going to come in and offer $330,000, $350,000. I mean, $250,000. It's anybody's guess what somebody would offer, based on a $400,000 asking price, but it has not generated not any offer, legitimate or otherwise. It's nothing. MR. KARPELES-This was two 6 month periods, two different six month periods that you're trying to sell it, right? That's what it says here 4/14/94 to-lO/14/94. You were asking $495,000 at that time? MR. LEVACK-Correct. MR. KARPELES-Then again you tried, 11/29/95 to 5/29/96? MR. LEVACK-Right. MR. KARPELES-So that's two 6 month periods. MR. LEVACK-Right. MR. KARPELES-How about in between? MR. LEVACK-Well, the property, I can say, was listed. It wasn't, there were sections where it wasn't out of the MLS, but it wasn't . that it was off the market. It was just out of the MLS, but it was on the market, and I can speak to that specifically because I've been the listing agent on the property, and we've never taken the property off the market since the Cat tone people came to us a year before they went out of business. The point is this property has done its market time. This property, people have been aware that it's been available. Even at the $495,000, we stress offers on properties, and encourage people to make offers, and no offers were made. I don't believe that that price, at the time, was out of market range to the point where somebody wouldn't make an offer on the property. I don't believe that the price was prohibitive to soliciting offers on the property. MR. O'LEARY-Could I ask the Staff, John, could I ask you to explain to me how you can have a difference and what the difference would be in a zoned area between heavy equipment and light equipment? I mean, it seems to be a contradiction in terms, but I'm sure there's an explanation. MR. GORALSKI-"Heavy equipment sales. The retail sales and service of trucks over one and one half tons, tractors, construction equipment and heavy machinery vehicles or motors. II This does not fit that definition. - 54 - --- -' (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. O'LEARY-Right, but I mean, the contradiction, maybe you could better answer it out of your experience than the Ordinances or the variance. MR. GORALSKI-I guess maybe I'm not sure what the question is. MR. O'LEARY-Well, it seems to be a contradiction that you could have heavy equipment in there, but you couldn't have light equipment in there. MR. GORALSKI - I guess I can best address that in that certain sections of town are reserved for certain uses. For example, you can't have a single family house in a light industrial zone. You may think that's a less intense zone and nobody would care, but the fact is you've reserved a section of town for specific uses, and you want to reserve that area so that you have the availability to provide for those uses. MR. O'LEARY-Okay. I see, you couldn't put a single family home in an area that was. MR. GORALSKI-Correct. MR. O'LEARY-Okay. MR. LEVACK-But there are many single family homes on Corinth Road. It is a mixed use area, and again, the point I'd like to make is that we're trying to transition a use here, and we don't get, we're looking to take one step down, and I would even argue a half a step, when we're not even coming out of a light industrial zone classification, to a highway commercial classification, which is probably where this is pigeon holed, John, would be this type of operation is a permitted use in highway commercial, plaza commercial, neighborhood commercial, but highway commercial comes right below light industrial and I would say that even within the light industrial, to go from heavy equipment sales and service and parts, to say that we're light equipment sales and service and parts, you can almost argue that we're not even leaving this zone classification, but the zone criteria the way it is written, John, I think defined it by saying over 1,000, what was the cutoff, John, over 1,000? MR. GORALSKI-One and a half tons. MR. LEVACK-One and a half tons. So to me that's the drawing line, that if we have a vehicle that's below one and a half tons, then we're no longer a permitted use in this zone. Maybe the zone definition needs to be expanded a little to allow for less than 1,000, but again, we're not going to address that here this evening. MR. THOMAS-Any other questions for the applicant? open the public hearing. If not, I'll PUBLIC HEARING OPENED CAROL USHER MRS. USHER-My name is Carol Usher. This is my husband Frank. We live at 461 Corinth Road. We've lived there for 40 years, next June it will be 40 years, and we're retired, and we'd like a little peace and quiet. Through the years we've had a lot of problems with the Niagara Mohawk lines, with the ATV's and the motorcycles going through. With the cooperation of the Niagara Mohawk, the Town of Queensbury, and the Warren County Sheriff's Department, we finally got that quieted down. In the last year it has really been almost heaven there. We know what's going to happen if a motorcycle shop goes in there. He can't vouch for his customers, - 55 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) saying that they won't test drive their vehicles up and down the pole lines. I don't know. We're just definitely opposed to the motorcycle noise. We put up a fence. We thought that would help when we were having the problems of the pole line. It didn't quiet it down. It's deafening. If we sat out in our yard, had friends over, we had to stop speaking. We couldn't hear each other with the motorcycles racing up and down. MR. KARPELES-Where do you live in relationship to? MRS. USHER-In relation to this particular building, we are right next door. Niagara Mohawk divides our property. We're right on Corinth and Pinello Roads. We're the corner lot. MR. STONE-So you're one building removed, if you will, plus the open area, from this building that we're talking about. This building is here. You're over here? MRS. USHER-Exactly. As far as the shop that was in there before, the cabinet shop, the kitchen cabinet shop, the saws didn't amount to the motorcycle noise. Most of them were inside. They didn't drive the table saw into the building like the motorcycles are going to have to drive into the building and out of the building. It wasn't that bad. We haven't had the big equipment, like you were talking about, running over there. We've never had a business over there. I understand they could have one there, but we never had it. So it's mostly what I am against is the noise of the motorcycles and the extra traffic. MR. THOMAS-Do yOu hear any noise now from the place because it is occupied now. MRS. USHER-No. MR. THOMAS-You don't hear any noise from motorcycles? There are motorcycles in there now, aren't there? MRS. USHER-But they're not running. MR. THOMAS-Do you do work in there now, repair? MR. KISLOWSKI-They're my own bikes and I run them constantly in there. MRS. USHER-But he doesn't have customers coming in and out, and while we're at it, if this is the first hearing, why has the sign already been changed? Why is it lit at night already? MR. THOMAS-That I couldn't tell you. Staff on that. You'd have to address the MRS. USHER-Isn't that against the Code? FRANK USHER MR. USHER-Doesn't a permit have to be issued? MR. THOMAS-If it's in compliance. MR. GORALSKI-Let me address all those questions. There is no existing sign permit. There's a permit for the sign that was there before. The new business is going to need a new sign permit. MRS. USHER-They've already got it. They've already changed it. MR. GORALSKI-Right. I can't go out there and make him take it down. What I can do is take an enforcement action against him. That's what I've done. Okay, and that's why he's here seeking the Use Variance. I can't do anything else until this hearing. - 56 - '-' ---- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. USHER-Well, in layman's terms, know how this works, you know. there's a sign that's already lit, in coming up here. so to speak, because you don't You look out your window and and say, well, what's the sense MRS. USHER-That's what we thought originally. MR. GORALSKI-That's how 1 found out about it, and as soon as we saw that he had moved into the building, we went out, told him he needed to get a Use Variance, he needed to get a site plan review, and this is the first step in the process. MR. USHER-Okay. MR. GORALSKI-But just so Mr. Kislowski knows, assuming he gets all his approvals, just because there's a sticker on there, that sticker is for the old sign, not your sign. MR. KISLOWSKI-That's what I thought, that that permit on that sign, but now I know what I have to do. MR. USHER-And the only thing I question here, too, is last week we get the thing in the mail to attend this meeting, and it stipulates that this gentleman here wants to run the shop and sell motorcycles and parts and whatever, and today I get another one for next week, which adds autos on. How come they don't read the same? MR. THOMAS-Which adds what? MR. USHER-Automobiles also. MR. LEVACK-I can answer that. MR. USHER-The sign that's out front also says motorcycles and auto sales. MR. KISLOWSKI-To buy motorcycles at a retail auction, you are required by the State of New York to be an auto dealer. There is no separation from a dealer of a motorcycle, a boat dealer. They're all a registered dealer. I could sell airplanes if I was permitted to sell airplanes at that spot, under the Motor Vehicle Law, which allows me to go to any auction that the public doesn't attend. MR. THOMAS-But you don't intend on selling cars? MR. KISLOWSKI-No. I don't want to sell cars. MR. THOMAS-If and when it comes to that point, we can address that. MR. KISLOWSKI-Ninety-eight percent of my business is motorcycles. At the auctions, I did buy a car to drive, but that is not my main business. MRS. USHER-But they'll be all used, and they'll need repairs. MR. KISLOWSKI-Ma'am, I'm not opening an auto repair shop. MRS. USHER-No, I'm talking about the motorcycles will be used, therefore, you'll probably have to make repairs on all of them, and you'll have to test them to see if they run. You certainly can't test them. MR. KISLOWSKI-The bikes that I work on do not go on power lines. MR. THOMAS-We're getting screwed up here with the recording. It's going to screw Maria up. You've got to talk into the microphone, - 57 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) and you can't go back and forth like this. It's screwing the things up. Mr. and Mrs. Usher have the floor right now. MR. KISLOWSKI-Okay. MR. THOMAS-DO you have any more questions? MRS. USHER-Yes. MR. THOMAS-Because you can ask the questions and then the applicant come back up and respond to them. MR. USHER-Well, the only thing I see here on this other one that isn't made clear yet is it says he may sell a few automobiles a year. Why does that have to be even stipulated in this, if he doesn't intend to sell them? MR. THOMAS-It didn't say that in the application I got. It didn't say anything about automobiles. MR. USHER-It's right here from the 22nd meeting. MR. THOMAS-So that's the Planning Board meeting. MR. USHER-What I'm trying to find out is why is it different in the two meetings? MR. THOMAS-You'd have to ask Staff about that. answer. Tha t I can't MR. GORALSKI-I'm not sure why it's worded differently in each one, but if he's going to sell automobiles, that needs to be included in any Use Variance he receives. MRS. USHER-Who will enforce the noise that will come from? MR. THOMAS-Enforcement comes from the Building Department, if I'm not mistaken. MR. GORALSKI-I'm the Code Compliance Officer. If there are stipulations related to noise in either a Zoning Board approval or a Planning Board approval, I would be the one that would be enforcing it. MRS. USHER-So we would have to make the complaint, though, each time. Somebody has to initiate it. MR, GORALSKI-Unless I was driving by and heard it, somebody would, yes. MRS. USHER-And their hours would be, you said eight to six, I believe? MR. THOMAS-I do believe Mr. Levack stated eight a.m. to six p.m. He did not say how many days a week, though. That was going to be one of my questions when he got back up here. MRS. USHER-Okay. Will it be seven days a week? MR. THOMAS-We'll find out. As soon as you get done with your questions, they'll be back up here to respond. MRS. USHER-That was one of our questions, and as far as buffers, like I said, we tried putting up a fence, a very thick fence. It didn't help, with the motorcycles, it just comes right over the fence. MR. THOMAS-That/s the motorcycles running up and down the - 58 - -- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) transmission right-of-way? MRS. USHER-Right, and there's going to be, the motorcycles have got to drive in and they've got to drive out. So we are going to hear that noise. Maybe in the shop he can muffle it. I don't know, but he's got to go in and out, and we're going to be hearing that, and what about oil and their waste products? Where are they going to dispose of those? MR. THOMAS-You'll get an answer when they get back up here. MRS. USHER-Okay, and are the cars, well, you said they, but are the motorcycles going to be displayed outside, or are they all going to be in that showroom? That's another question. We have a petition, which I believe it's in your hands. That is a copy of our petition. We have the original with more signatures on. We had such a short time, we could get a lot more. We were out of town when our letter came in, but if you need more, we certainly can get more. MR. THOMAS-I think if you bring them to the Planning Board, I think they would take them also, in consideration, at the meeting on the 22nd, which is next Tuesday. MRS. USHER-Okay. MR. THOMAS-Depending on what happens here. MRS. USHER- I believe some of my other neighbors would like to speak. MR. GREEN-Just a quick question. Where are you located on this map? MR. GORALSKI-On the corner of Pinello and. MR. GREEN-This right here? MR. USHER-Yes. MR. GREEN-You mentioned that the Niagara Mohawk-right-of-way cuts through your property? MRS. USHER-It divides our property and Mr. Lebowitz's property. The previous owners took down, there was a big buffer there of pines and trees and shrubbery and everything, and they cleared it completely out. 80 it's an open field right over to them. MR. GORALSKI-If you're asking me why the tax map doesn't reflect that right-of-way going all the way out to Corinth Road, I don't know. MR. GREEN-That's why I was confused about finding which parcel was theirs. MRS. USHER-Yes. We're right on the Corinth Road. MR. GORALSKI-The only thing I can guess is that Mr. Lebowitz maintains ownership and Niagara Mohawk has an easement over his property. MR. THOMAS-That would be my guess. MRS. USHER-Some of the property owners that border Niagara Mohawk, inclJding us, have obtained leases with Niagara Mohawk to stop, when we were having such a problem with the motorcycles, we went through all of that to get the lease so we would have the authority to call the Sheriff's Department to have them come down. We had - 59 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) quite a, we've had quite a time. MR. THOMAS-Anything else you want to add, questions you want to ask? MRS. USHER-I'd like to add a lot more, but I'll wait. MR. THOMAS-You can always come back after everybody else goes through. MRS. USHER-Okay. MR. USHER-We might. MR. THOMAS-Do you want to respond to the questions? MR. LEVACK-Can we hear them all, then we'll respond to all of them at once. MR. THOMAS-Okay. PAUL BAIRD MR. BAIRD-My name is Paul Baird. I live at 462 Corinth Road, which is across from pinello Road, and we have the power line, well, actually between myself and West Mountain Sales, which is across from where this fellow is talk about his bike shop. My dad had a saw mill, heavy equipment, made a lot of noise. They still have heavy equipment-running (lost words). I don't mind any of them. It's these damn motorcycles. My son's got them. I hate them. You get one, it's not too bad. You get 10, 12 or more, they're bad. I'm sure you've been around, you've heard them when they get in a group. They can talk about their mufflers and whatever you want. My son had one right on the road, in fact, both of them do. They will make noise. Now, maybe he can keep the noise down. I'm not sure, but I'm just considering, if he does business the way he'd like to do it, he'd have a lot of bikes in there all taking off at one time. There is going to be noise, and there's no question about that, and if they start running up and down this power line again, that's not going to be good either. My wife has tried for 10 to 20 years now to stop these bikes and all terrain vehicles and what have you from going up and down this power line. Now, maybe they can stop it. Just think, if somebody's on the Luzerne Road and they want to go to him and get something fixed, they're going to drive down that power line, and it's not to be driven on. It's no trespassing. Period. So I don't know, if it goes through, and there's any problem with noise, we'll get this fellow's phone number and just dial him and see what can be done about it. That's about the simplest thing I can say. MR. THOMAS-The only thing I can say about the power lines is that the traffic going up and down, Niagara Mohawk has made an effort to curtail that by putting barriers across there, poles in the ground with guidewire going through it with the orange shielding on it, and I don't know what else they can do. I'm an employee of Niagara Mohawk, and I kind of sort of deal with that stuff, and they've made an effort, but you can't watch them all. MR. BAIRD-It's been much better. If they even think that they're going to start up on something like this again, that's not going to be good at all, because we call up the Sheriff's Office. My wife 'does, I don't. She goes out and she gets the finger and she gets these nasty words and this kind of stuff, especially from these guys riding these vehicles back and forth, and I don't think it's necessary, and I'm afraid one of them's going to haul off and hit her, almost did one day, and there's no reason for that. Anyway, that's about all I can say. - 60 - ~ (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. THOMAS-Okay. Thank you. ELISSA DUROSS MRS. DUROSS-My name is Elissa DuRoss. I live at 27 pinello Road. That's about halfway down the street from the end of the road where the business is going to be, and my concern is the noise, like everybody else's, but also my concern is that we live on a dead end street which is, well, it's quite a distance from Corinth Road, and right now we have a lot of people that run our three wheelers up and down our street at night, during the day time, during the early morning hours. We have people come in there with motorcycles to cut through to the pole line so that they can't be seen. They cut across our property, go out into the back on the other streets. We have, I dare say, probably 20 kids, little kids, on our street, and I feel it's a safety hazard to have a motorcycle shop that close. They've got to try these motorcycles out some place, and I don't think they're going to go on the pole lines when they've got signs up there, no trespassing, but there's nothing going to stop them from running down our street to try them out, and maybe possibly some little kid, which little kids do often, go out in the road and getting hit by one of these motorcycles, and you know and I know that this is what's going to happen. They're going to try them out on a dead end street, because they figure, well, we just had the brakes fixed. We don't want to go out on the main highway with this bike, because the brakes might not work. You know. You've had that happen before. My son worked in a garage, Sears, as a matter of fact. A guy came in there and had the tires all changed, and guess what, somebody forgot to put the lug nuts on the tires, and he starts down the road and he loses the tire and the car tips over. So there's always room for mistakes, and that's all I've got to say, you know, we'll see what happens. MR. THOMAS-Okay. Next? LYNETTE GOODRICH GILMORE MRS. GILMORE-My name's Lynette Goodrich Gilmore, and I live on 16 Pinello Road, which is right behind her, or next to her, whichever way. I'm behind her on pinello Road or next, whatever. Anyway. The business is right behind me. We're here and-they're here, and the NiMo also goes in between us, and I am also concerned about the 'noise, and I know it's not their fault, but I work nights. So I sleep days, and I have to be to work in an hour, but I don't want to have to hear the motorcycles going up and down. He says that the motorcycles that you sell are not the dirt bikes, but he also sells ski-doos, and I don' t know if he's intending on selling snowmobiles, and he can't test drive those on the road, and they would probably be test driven on that right of way there, and I'm concerned about the noise level, and that's basically what I am concerned about, and it's just an easy access. It's open there for anything to be used, and the noise has been bad in the past. Last year or two, it's been pretty quiet, and I'm afraid it's going to start up again, and we are the next road over from them, and bikes are likely to, regular bikes are likely to go up and down our road to test drive. MR. MENTER-Why has it quieted down in the past year? MRS. GILMORE-A lot of people, some people have moved out of the area. That's just my opinion. MRS. USHER-We've called the Sheriff's Department constantly. Niagara Mohawk has put up the signs and the barriers, which helps a great deal. MRS. GILMORE-Yes. - 61 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MRS. USHER-But there's ways to get in it through their property. It's all open on their side. MRS. GILMORE-Yes, and we've had problems in the past with snowmobiles even cutting right through our property, through our property to get to the pole lines. So, I don't know if you plan on selling ski-doos, are they water vehicles or snowmobiles? MR. KISLOWSKI-I'll address that. MRS. GILMORE-Okay. That's all I have to say. Thank you. MR. THOMAS-Thanks. ROLAND AKINS MR. AKINS-I'm Roland Akins. I live on the Corinth Road. I own 30 acres to the west of this property. First of all, he has no buffer between his property and mine. Mine is zoned residential. I think between a light industrial and a residential there's supposed to be a 50 foot buffer. MR. GORALSKI-Yes. That's a pre-existing, nonconforming building. He doesn't have to move the building. MR. AKINS-My property at one time was zoned like that. Then it was road front commercial. They switched it to residential. Now they've switched all of mine back to light industrial. Well, anyway. I oppose the variance. It's going to be an impact on my property. It's an entirely different business than the cabinet business that was there before and the floor covering. I'll gamble that the uses they can have in there won't effect my property as much as a bike shop. Like the other people said, we've fought motorcycles every year, running on our property. In the last few years that's a lot better. I don't understand how he can sell ski- doos and motorcycles and control the people that are coming in and trying them out. As far as Mark mentioned a few minutes ago, he threw out, well, you'll either have a junk yard or an asphalt business in there. I'm sure when that zone was set up, or you can check back, John, that that wasn't allowed in that particular zone, any additional junk yards. I'm not sure you're going to read it in that book, but when that zone was set up. MR. GORALSKI-I know what you're talking about, yes. He's absolutely correct. Originally, this was not zoned light industrial in 1988. When several of the property owners came in and requested that it be rezoned to light industrial, one of the restrictions was that junk yards were not allowed. That's correct. MR. AKINS-I sunk a lot of money into my property, too, and it's going to definitely impact my property. I'll gamble heavy equipment or something in there quicker than a bike shop. Thank you. MR. THOMAS-Thank you. Anyone else? TIM BREWER MR. BREWER-I'm Tim Brewer. I live on Candleberry Drive. It really doesn't effect my property. I live off of Sherman Island Road. I guess the biggest concern I have is, if he's going to be a licensed automotive dealer, the agenda for the Planning Board says to sell cars. I just want to make sure that, if he gets an approval, it's going to be motorcycles, not cars also. I guess what I'm saying is, once you open that door, he says he's going to sell two cars, and he's successful, he might end up selling 30 or 40 or whatever the number it might be. I'm not saying that's what he's going to - 62 - '-.--. -----' (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) do, but I just want to close the door on that issue. As far as the motorcycles, my father-in-law owns the property next door. I was down there a couple of weeks ago. Four wheelers are in there. There's just no stopping them, I mean, unless you're there every day of the week, and if this gentleman is going to sell them, t~ey will ride in there. I've had them come up in illY back yard, wh~ch is probably, as the crow flies, maybe half a mile, three quart7rs of a mile away. They don't know who owns the property. They th~nk God owns it, I guess, and they just drive through there. Many times I've had them come up the hill, across the brook, into my own back yard. Once they get to my back ya~d, they turn around becau~e they know somebody lives there, but I Just thlnk, no fault c;>f thJ.s gentleman's or John's or anybody's, they have no place to r~de, no legal place to ride in the Town of Queensbury, and they're going to ride where they can, and I'd prefer not to have them in my back yard. Thank you. MR. THOMAS-Anyone else? I guess you're back up, Mark. MR. LEVACK-Thanks. It's obvious there's a motorcycle problem out there that you people are concerned about, and rightfully so that you're concerned about that. This is not a problem that was caused by Jim. It's not a problem that's created by Jim, but what I hear you saying is that you think this problem is going to be further worsened by Jim and Jim's operation there. A working person just like you, trying to earn a living. He's in the business of selling motorcycle sales and related parts and accessories. Jim can speak here in a second to basically tell you whatever he has in mind to help mitigate those, and I think that, you know, Jim might even be able to be more of an asset to you people here this evening than a liability, and I think you need to keep an open mind, I would hope that you could keep an open mind on working this thing out. It's just unfortunately, I guess coincidentally, that this building that we're looking to try to put this to happens to be on a power line where there's currently motorcycles and bikes and ATV's and all sorts of things disturbing these property owners right now. I'd like to point out that everyone of the causes of these problems that Jim, with the exception of snowmobiles and ATV's, but Jim doesn't sell dirt bikes, and they're the noisiest, highest revving, highest decibel, and snowmobiles, but not as loud as most dirt bikes, but he. doesn't sell dirt bikes. He sells· road bikes, but anyway, the point is Jim didn't create this problem. This operation happens to be coincidentally next to a power line where there's an existing problem. I think Jim can be an asset in helping to solve that problem. As far as the Sign Variance goes, Jim got a little bit ahead of himself, didn't know that that existing Sign Variance wasn't applicable to that sign and that's why we're here this evening, also didn't know that his use wasn't an applicable use in the building, and that's also why we're here this evening. As far as the automobile sales go, I can say that the application here that we're asking for this evening is specifically written, and the Use Variance that we're seeking this evening will not deviated from what is specifically written here this evening. I filled out the Use Variance, as Jim's agent here this evening. Jim filled out the application for Site Plan approval. Had I done both, there wouldn't be that inconsistency. So we're going to have to make some erasures on the Site Plan application and eliminate that from the Site Plan application. Obviously, we're not seeking that for a Use Variance here this eveníng. I'm going to let Jim address the waste oil products and how he intends on disposing of them. I'm going to let him address the displaying of any type of merchandise or equipment outdoors. I think we've said that that wasn't going to be the case. As far as the test track is concerned, Jim and Jim's operation does not intend on making that power line a test track. He doesn't intend on making that property a test track, and as far as people coming to and from the business, these are consumers. These are the ways that they choose to get around, and it's free enterprise, and free - 63 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) economy, and I don't know that we can certainly prevent people from riding motorcycles, and I think, again, if you listen to a lot of the Gold Wings motorcycles out there today, 90% of them are not objectionable, and I think that sometimes when you get into these situations, the situation seems to be a little panicked and a little bit reactionary. I was talking to Tim Brewer over here this evening about the go kart track that was in front of the Board and everybody was so concerned that it was going to be this noisy monster, and Tim said this evening that he attended Disney World. If they had one car they had 100 cars, and he was standing there talking to the people in his party. So, you know, these noise issues are real issues. They're tangible issues, but I think they're issues that can be dealt with, you know, very up front and very realistically and we can all work together as neighbors to try to do business in this Town. MR. KISLOWSKI-Okay. The waste oil that I will conduct with will be taken out by Safety Kleen. There's companies that come and pick up any waste oil and motorcycles have nowhere's near as much oil as a car does. For the motorcycles to be displayed during the business hours, I'd like to be able to put some of them out in the front to let the people know what kind of business it is. I don't intend to put them two feet from the road, you know, keep them near the building. As far as the problem that the people are having with the power lines there, I sympathize with them. I wouldn't want that in my yard either, and I'll do anything that I can to help them to stop those people from going in there, but I'll tell you, any customer that 1 have will not be riding on there, or I'll call the Sheriff on them myself. I'm an AMA promoter, and being an AMA promoter, that does not, you know, I have to uphold these kind of rules for other people also. The bikes, they're talking about noise coming and going. The Americade bikes,' you know, the bigger bikes, they're not loud. The Harley's are what make the noise, and when they make noise, they're not passing New York State inspection. If I'm a New York State inspection, then they're not going to get inspected from me if they have loud exhaust. As far as this dead end street, these people think that all these people are going to be riding their $25,000 motorcycle up the power lines. That doesn't happen. That's for people with dirt bikes and things like that. MR. LEVACK- (Lost words) concerned that they would be using the roads in and around this area to test drive these vehicles. MR. KISLOWSKI-Yes. I'm sorry that your son had a misfortunate with lug nuts or brakes or something, but I'm very much a professional. I check my work two or three times. Somebody's bike does not leave if it's not correct. Nobody will test drive their bikes. The people will drive their motorcycle to my shop. They will drop it off. If it doesn't run when they bring it there, they'll bring it on a trailer or a truck. I will service their motorcycle. I'll get it running. That doesn't require to drive it up and down the street or up and down the power lines. I have a Dyno Tune that, you set a bike on there, and it gives you a computer read out of how many horse power at how many RPM's the bike runs at. You cannot re-jet a motorcycle by riding it down the road and trying it. It's virtually impossible. That's why you have a DYn0 Tune machine that goes inside, that the bike sits on, and the back wheel turns. ,MR. THOMAS-I think people are concerned about the motorcycles you have for sale. You just don' t go in and buy a motorcycle and drive off with it. It's like a car. You go out and try it out. MR. KISLOWSKI-No. MR. THOMAS-That's what these people are concerned about, that they don't want to go up and down, if it's an inexperienced rider, they - 64 - -..-/. (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) wouldn't want to go up and down the Corinth Road with that. They would want to go off on a quiet side street and pinello Str7et right there is the first convenient quiet side street, on your slde of the road. So that's what they're concerned about. You can't really stop them. It's a public highway. MR. KISLOWSKI-I would put a sign up telling people. MR. LEVACK-Whether you're two miles down the road or 20 miles down the road, we couldn't prevent those people from test driving down that road. MR. THOMAS-But that's a concern that these people have. That's one we have to address. MR. KISLOWSKI-I understand the concern. MRS. GILMORE-Can I ask you a question about the snow mobiles? Those can't be test driven on the road. MR. KISLOWSKI-Snowmobiles also tested on a Dyno Tune machine. It's a large machine that the track sits on, the whole unit, the whole snowmobile sits up on a table. It's about four and a half feet high so you don't have to bend over to work on it, and you run the snowmobile on top of this Dyno Tune machine. MRS. GILMORE-But if a customer wants to buy it, he wants to try it out first. MR. KISLOWSKI-Then he can put it on the trailer and take it somewhere and try it. The liability insurance will not allow me to let people free for all allover the property on a snowmobile. MR. THOMAS-Right, but what about these people that want to come in and buy a snowmobile? MR. KISLOWSKI-They can start it up and they can ride it. They can take it to Lake George. They can take it to West Mountain trails, State trails, you know. MR. THOMAS-And how are they going to get it therE! if they come in driving a car. MR. KISLOWSKI-Well, if they have a snowmobile, they're going to have to have a way to carry it around, wouldn't they, a trailer? MR. THOMAS-Yes, but I mean, what if somebody came in off the street, like me, that doesn't own a pick up truck. I want to buy a snowmobile from you. Where do I try it? MR. LEVACK-Jim would make arrangements to trailer it down to the State trails at West Mountain Road and then you could test drive it out at West Mountain Road. People, I really don't think that the reality of people tearing out of this property with a snowmobile down the power line or on the property, as Jim said, he can't allow people to hop on a ski-doo and get on his property, or if it isn't leaving on a trailer off of his property, then he certainly can't have that. This has got to be trailered off of his property. It would in no way be tested on the property, therefore should not be tested on the adjoining property, because you'd have to get it off of his property to get it onto the adjoining property. So I think that Jim is right on top of not having these vehicles tested in and around this location. He came here this evening with, I think, a good use for a good building, and I think we've demonstrated that there's clearly an economic hardship on the building. I think that the use that we're proposing on this building being a light equipment sales and service kind of snuggles within the heavy equipment sales and service zone, and I've been working with Jim - 65 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) for about three to four months now, and I'm very convinced that I would stake my reputation on him doing everything that he said he was going to do here this evening. I would encourage Jim to get to know these property owners in the rear, on a one on one first name basis, and not have there be this line drawn in the sand as a "we" "they" scenario. We see this so many times with these projects that ultimately, you know, they benefit the Town. They benefit the economy. They benefit this property owner, and they certainly benefit Jim, because he is out on a limb to get his business open, and he's financial extended, right now, at this location. So we'd just encourage you to have Jim get in touch with the property owners and pose whatever, the other question was, the Saturday hours. He's open from nine to two on Saturday, and no Sunday operation. MR. THOMAS-Eight to six Monday through Friday, eight to two on Saturday. MR. KISLOWSKI-Nine to two. MR. LEVACK-Nine to two on Saturday, and closed on Sunday, and, you know, again, stressing the point that Jim wants to be a friendly neighbor. He wants to conduct a very good business there, and he'll do anything within his power to see that that happens with these property owners in the-rear. MR. THOMAS-Does anyone on the Board have anymore questions for the applicant? MRS. DUROSS-Elissa DuRoss, and I would like to know, you said you came here from Schenectady, and moving your business up from there? MR. KISLOWSKI-Yes. MRS. DUROSS-Would you mind if anyone was to contact the place where you came from and find out what kind of business you run down there? MR. KISLOWSKI-You sure could. My dad owns the property, and he just leased it to Channing Construction Company. MRS. DUROSS-No. I mean, talking to the neighbors and seeing what type of business you run down there. MR. KISLOWSKI-I've never had one complaint from a neighbor down there, so you could very well, I could get you a list of their names. MRS. DUROSS-Well, I would just like the address. I'll get my own list. MR. KISLOWSKI-Okay. You can do whatever you'd like, but I could provide you with the people's names and phone numbers. MRS. DUROSS-Well, that would be okay, too, but I would just like to know where you're coming from. MR. KISLOWSKI-I see on your list here you have undesirable people, noise and dust. What is undesirable about motorcycle people? MRS. DUROSS-Well, there's a motorcycle shop up on Sunnyside Road. MR. KISLOWSKI -That's a Harley Davidsen shop. Do you know the difference between Harley Davidsens? MRS. DUROSS-Yes, I do. My neighbor has a Harley Davidsen, and he has a bike like you're talking about that runs a lot of money that they sell for, and it is noisy. - 66 - '- --' (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. KISLOWSKI-Okay. So for your question, yes, I can give you a list of the names and the people that lived all around myoId shop. MRS. DUROSS-Yes, I would like that, and I would like to go down there and just see what your old shop was like and where you tried them out. MR. KISLOWSKI-They didn't try them out anywhere. In the complex there, there was no room for that. That's why a Dyno Tune machine is so important in a motorcycle business now. MRS. DUROSS-Well, I'm talking about if I come into your shop and I say, I want to buy a new bike, but I don't want to buy this bike until I try it out. You're going to furnish me with, I can't tow a trailer with my car because it's too little. So you're going to furnish me with a car and a trailer and you're going to take that some place where I can try it out? Right? MR. KISLOWSKI-A motorcycle? MRS. DUROSS-A motorcycle, or ski-doo or whatever I might buy. MR. KISLOWSKI-Well, if you're going to buy a ski-doo, we would have to transfer it to some place for you to try it, but if you were going to buy a motorcycle, you would have a New York State motorcycle driver's license. I would give you an insurance card, a dealer plate, and then you could go and test drive the motorcycle. MRS. DUROSS-I could, but where would I try it out? MR. KISLOWSKI-On a New York State road. MRS. DUROSS-On any road, right? MR. KISLOWSKI-That's right. MRS. DUROSS-Including my dead end street. We get right back to that, and as I say, there's kids there, but I'll tell you one thing, if you get this variance to get in there, I'm the snoopiest neighbor that you're going to have. I'm going to be taking pictures. I'm going to be watching you every minute. MR. KISLOWSKI-I don't think you're being very fair with me, ma'am. MR. DUROSS-Well, you're not being fair with us, I know that, and the dust. These people right here, they had a brand new pool put in, and nobody said anything about the dust going in to their pool, and they had to hire people to come there and clean it, and you said you put crushed stone down. Do you know what crushed stone does when you get in there and you spin around in it? It makes lots of dust. MR. THOMAS-Any more questions for the applicant from the Board? Any ~orrespondence? MRS. LAPHAM-Yes, public comment. Okay. Variance No. 94-1996, this was received October 16th, to the Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals "We would like to take this opportunity to voice an opinion on the proposed use variance # 94-1996 for James C. Kislowski. We wish to bring the Zoning Board's attention our deep concern regarding this project. It is our understanding hat the applicant, Mr. Kislowski, proposes to operate a retail showroom for motorcycles and other small motorized products, coupled with a retail outlet and service/repair shop. Although, we as residents realize that the present zoning in this area (LI-1A) does allow business usage, this particular request from this applicant is not - 67 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) legally permitted as per zoning regulations. Our main concern at this time is primarily the noise transmitted from the motorcycles and other recreational vehicles. It is obvious that these vehicles will need to be test driven, both on and off the road or examined upon repair. We would like to inform the Board that noise levels of this sort are totally unacceptable. Properties adjoining and in close proximity have been plagued for years with the annoyance of motorcycles and ATV's. Numerous phone calls have been made to the authorities to relieve the area of these vehicles. Residents have gone to the extreme to lease property from Niagara Mohawk to further keep out motorcycles and such. Niagara Mohawk has posted its property and constructed barricades to hinder the use of vehicles on their premises. Let it also be known, that in combination with the noise there will also be an influx of traffic on an already busy highway. Although we have other concerns regarding this project, we felt it vital to inform the board of the aforementioned. Therefore, we as residents of the Town of Queensbury stand very much opposed to Mr. Kislowski's request for a use variance. We feel that our concerns are important and highly recommend that this letter be read aloud either prior to or during the Zoning Board meeting and that it be documented into the minutes as public record. Respectfully submitted, Please see attached petition." And there are 10 names. I think most of the people are here. Do you want me to read the names? MR. THOMAS-No, that's all right. It's enough to say that there's 10 signatures on that petition. MRS. LAPHAM-There are 10 signatures on the petition, most of which seem to me to be people that we've just heard from. MR. THOMAS-Okay. Anything else? No other correspondence in there? MRS. LAPHAM-No, that's it. MEMBER OF PUBLIC-We have other people that have signed the original petition. We didn't have time to get it up here. MR. THOMAS-Okay. Well, we've got the one petition with the 10 signatures on it. Like I said, if this goes before the Planning Board, you can take those other signatures to the Planning Board with you. Anymore questions for the applicant? MR. KARPELES-Have you tried to rent a space somewhere else, where this would be in a zone that would be permitted? MR. KISLOWSKI-Yes, I have. That facility right there actually fits my needs financially, you know, the size wise. The place that I would like to, when my lease does run out, Sportline is building a new facility, and I'd like to try and move into their facility. MR. KARPELES-Sportline, where is that? MR. KISLOWSKI-That's in Queensbury. MR. THOMAS-Sportline Honda's building a new building on Quaker Road. MR. GORALSKI-The Lake George Road. The existing Sport line Honda building is next to Jeckel and Sons Honda. MR. KARPELES-You've exhausted all the possibilities? MR. KISLOWSKI-Yes, we have. I've been working with Mr. Levack for quite a while on this, and my dad has leased the property that I had previously for the last six years, and with the option for the people to buy it, and Schenectady is getting very deprived, so he - 68 - '-'" (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) wanted to sell it, and I can't blame him. MR. KARPELES-No, but I mean in this area? MR. KISLOWSKI-Yes, I did. I looked around allover the place. MR. STONE-John, a question of Staff. motorcycles? Where can you sell MR. GORALSKI-In Highway Commercial zones. MR. STONE-Highway Commercial. MR. LEVACK-I feel that we've explored all the Highway Commercial properties that Jim had as his financial parameters and his space parameters, his location parameters, and I'm very confident that this building is the perfect, the highest and best use of this building right now, as I see it, is a motorcycle sales and service, light equipment sales and service building. MR. THOMAS-Any more questions? MR. LEVACK-If there was a better location, we wouldn't want to have to subject ourself to Use Variances. I mean, this is a last resort, both for the seller and for the applicant, the property owner here this evening. I feel comfortable that we've exhausted those avenues. MR. BREWER-Tim Brewer again. I'd just like to make comment to the point that Mark says, this is a last resort. The applicant moved in, opened up for business. So I don't think a variance is the last resort. He didn't even know he needed a variance. I think if it was myself, and I was going to invest a substantial amount of money, I would find out if the business could go there. There is an area in this Town for this use. I understand he's in and he wants to get going, but I think you have to consider that, and also it's not only noise from motorcycles. Motorcycles cause damage. The woods are a perfect place to ride. That's where the woods are. Right in his back door, and that's my opinion, and I am opposed to this application. Thank you. MR. KISLOWSKI-Again, I'd like to let you know that there's not going to be any bikes that are going to be riding in the woods there. If you tried to take an Aspencade bike through the woods, you'd rip all the plastic off it. MR. BREWER-I don't want to get into a debate, but when you opened up, you had dirt bikes on display there. MR. KISLOWSKI-Those aren't dirt bikes. MR. AKINS-What were they? Educate us on it, because they look like dirt bikes to me. MR. KISLOWSKI -That is a top fuel professional hill climb bike. That only gets raced in AMA sanctioned events. It's not a toy for riding around in the woods. MR. LEVACK-And to address Tim's other comment on, you had two comments, Tim. What was the second one? MR. KISLOWSKI-The woods and the noise. MR. LEVACK-No. It was opening up. We want the Board to know this was not a, lets just get in and try to open and not worry about it. Jim was under a time commitment. He needed a roof over his head to put his business. He's been extremely stressed out and extremely tensed out, and Jim felt that was a permitted use, only because of - 69 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) the Sign Variance found that it wasn't, and Jim got ahead of me in the deal after we showed him the property. So we weren't walking him through the process every step of the way, and I called the Town Planning Board to basically alter them to the fact that we did not put Jim into this building only to then know that we had to go back for a Use Variance. I've been in this business for too long, and I know that you have to do things in a very sequential manner, and this deal got out of my control because Jim went to the property owner and said, hey, can I move in, and he said, sure, go ahead, move in. So we were playing catch up all the way, but regardless of all that, I think the arguments for financial hardship have been made. I feel that the location, all the other prospects have been exhausted. This is, in my opinion, the highest and best use of this property, and I genuinely, genuinely believe that if these neighbors are willing to cooperate with Jim and give Jim a chance, I know that Jim is willing to cooperate with them and work to make this situation right. Like I said, I think he can be an asset to that bike situation on the trails. MR. THOMAS-Anymore questions before I close the public hearing? PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. THOMAS-Bonnie, what do you think? MRS. LAPHAM-I'm torn, really, because I do think that Mark has shown financial hardship on the part of the owner. I mean, a property that's been on the market for more than two years without any kind of offer certainly shows some hardship. On the other hand, I'm very sympathetic toward the neighbor's concerns of noise and dust, and I'm not sure it's been proven to me totally that these would be eliminated. MR. THOMAS-But there's four different tests that they have to meet for a Use Variance. Do you think that the applicant has demonstrated all four? MRS. LAPHAM-The first one has been met. I think the second, the third there may four I think probably have been met. convinced. I can't say for sure that be an adverse, but one and Two and three, I'm not MR. THOMAS-Because in order to grant a Use Variance, you have to meet all four. MRS. LAPHAM-All four. So that is my feeling. MR. THOMAS-Lou? MR. STONE-I'm sympathetic, but I agree that Use Variance criteria are very difficult to meet, and we're talking, kind of mentioning apples and oranges here. I recognize you, Mark, are representing the owner of the property who will have the Use Variance. Jim will merely be allowed to rent that space. The owner also has three or four other buildings on that property, and once you grant a Use Variance for one thing, we might not be obligated, but it would be easier for him to come in and say, well, I need a Use Variance for these other pieces of property. So that part of me says I don't think I ought to grant it. The hardship, you've been trying to rent it for a number of years. I'm not necessarily sure that that proves it can't make money for which it's zoned. Certainly the hardship to the neighbors is a concern. They've been fighting a battle for about 20 years, it sounds like, fighting motorcycles. It's not Jim's fault that he sells motorcycles. I understand, but unfortunately when you have an itch and it gets scratched a number of times, it's a big concern to the people who are itching. I'm going to listen to what my Board members have to say, but right now I'm inclined to turn it down. - 70 - '-" (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. THOMAS-Don? MR. O'LEARY-I don't think it meets the test of financial hardship. A $330,000 investment that they tried to sell it for two six mon~h multiple listing periods for $495,000, without too much success, lS not exactly a hardship in this economic climate. If you look around at the properties that are for sale and have been for sale for a long, long time in this area, and I'm not sure that it's, with all due respect to Jim, I'm not sure that a single proprietorship with a relatively short term lease is the solution to the financial problem. I don't think that, it's like the boat has sailed if we lose this particular lease, visa vee making the case for a financial hardship. I think the rest of the problem is, unfortunately, the people who have to put up with the noise and Jim who has to make a go of his shop. It's almost, I think, a red herring in this case. I think Mr. Lebowitz should be here with you, Mark, making the case that his investment is really in jeopardy. It's really a hardship, and this is the only way he has to go, and I'm not sure he could make that case. MR. THOMAS-Bill? MR. GREEN-Well, I think I do feel that there is a problem with the return on the land, as with most of the other pieces in the area. It has been vacant for an awful long time, and I know if I owned that parcel, I would want some sort of income from it. He's not deliberately leaving it empty because somebody's not offering him enough. I think, after being vacant for so long, anything is better than nothing. Is the alleged hardship relating to this property unique, or apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood? It may not be unique to this particular parcel, but I think that whole area is somewhat unique. Maybe I'm making this too big, but I'm not certain that some of the other areas in that light industrial zone, I had my map out, are experiencing the same difficulty in producing a profit, as these few parcels in here in the front. I really don't believe that this type of operation that Mr. Kislowski has described to us is going to have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. I don't think his business, as he has purported it to us, and he would know, are going to increase, have any additional traffic on this area behind your homes. I'm very sympathetic to that situation, but I don't think'his business is going to increase that situation, and as far as being a minimal relief, if you look at some of the other businesses that could be in that area, freight terminal, extraction of sand or gravel, light manufacturing, heavy machinery repair, you have the logging people down, construction company. They could be out there building what have you. I think it would be a pretty good use relative to the other ones that are around there. MR. THOMAS-Dave? MR. MENTER-There's a couple of issues that are almost side issues but I think that whole area, everybody has a hardship in that area. You guys do, and the commercial property owners or the industrial property owners have a hardship. Everybody's got a hardship. It' s tough on you guys that try to deal with this constantly. Is there a lack of reasonable return shown for this property? Probably. It seems like it goes over the undue hardship line for me, but one thing that jumped out at me right at the beginning, everybody here is a victim of lousy zoning. That's what this is, and it puts us in a dilemma, because one of the things we'd have to do is show that the property is unique. It isn't. Half the properties on that road have this problem. So the zoning stinks. So we should say, no, not grant anything and throw it all back to the Town and say, you better come up with something pretty quick. That's really what should be happening here. To give variances, routinely in a specific area for the same thing is not the way it's supposed to work, it seems to me, but that doesn't help anybody here. So that - 71 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) was kind of a side line, but as I said, I believe that a reasonable return is not possible with this property, and I believe that there's enough question that this would effect the current character of the neighborhood, and there's enough neighbor opposition, because these people have a right to certain things and a home. My home is also nonconforming, I guess. It's in a commercial piece of property. It's on a very busy road, and I'll tell you, if I ever go to jail, it's going to be for shooting some guy who's going by on a Harley and just went through five years in about 50 feet. So I know what that can be, and I think that the neighbor's concerns here are pretty relevant. MR. GREEN-Could I ask you a question? MR. MENTER-Yes. MR. GREEN-If Mr. Kislowski was opening up a cotton ball packing company and every one of these people came in and said they didn't want the noise that that cotton ball packing factory was going to generate. MR. MENTER-Is that a nonconforming cotton ball packing factory? MR. GREEN-Yes, it is. They said they didn't want the noise that that factory was going to generate, and Mr. Kislowski said, it's not going to make any noise. We hand load cotton balls into a box and put tape on it. You know there's no noise there. MR. MENTER-Yes."-Okay. MR. GREEN-Do you simply go by the word of the 10 people or the word of the person that knows? MR. MENTER-Well, everyone has experience. In my education, what I know at that point, may lead me to know that there's not going to be noise from the cotton ball factory. With everything I've heard tonight, I don't know that this is not going to effect noisy vehicle traffic in that area. That's the difference. I guess the bottom line is I'd be inclined, probably, not to approve this variance. MR. KISLOWSKI - It's not a Harley shop, though. There's not going to be Harley's there. MR. MENTER-I understand. That was just, Harley wasn't the issue. MR. KISLOWSKI-Everybody's looking at this with a real narrow mind here. They really are. They look at motorcycles in a big picture and it's a big problem. It's not if it's conducted the correct way, and I intend to do it the right way so I can make money. MR. THOMAS-I've got to cut you off, because the public hearing is closed. MR. KISLOWSKI-Okay. I'm sorry. MR. MENTER-I'll address that. I understand that, but these people have valid concerns, and I guess, the way I'm looking at it, I would need to know that that impact was not going to be there, and I don't. MR. THOMAS-Bob? MR. KARPELES-Well, there might very well be a financial hardship here, but I don't feel that it's been proven that there's a financial hardship. I don't think the material that was submitted is sufficient to prove that there's a financial hardship, that it can't be used for something else that it's zoned for, and I also - 72 - -- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) feel there's an adverse effect on the essential character of the neighborhood. I agree with the neighbors. So I think I would be inclined to turn this down. MR. THOMAS-The first thing I see on this is the essential character of the neighborhood would be changed, I mean, for as long as Mr. Kislowski is there, but I also understand that these buildings have been empty for two years plus, and I do believe that the financial hardship has been shown. Is this unique? Well, it's like Bill said, or someone said, I think it was Bill said 50% of that road is commercial anyway, and the alleged hardship has not been self created, it was self created because it's not allowed in that zone. What I was kicking around is maybe tabling this. Letting the neighbors have a chance to talk to the people around where his shop was in Schenectady, and see what they think, see what those people down there say that Mr. Kislowski's business was like, and let Mr. Kislowski do virtually the same thing, bring in some kind of documentation from people around that his business was conducted in a manner that would be conducive to a neighborhood like this. Where was your business? MR. KISLOWSKI-Right in the middle of Schenectady, Foster Avenue. MR. THOMAS-Was there surrounding residential? MR. KISLOWSKI-That's all that's there is houses, and my father owned a construction yard there, and I rented one of the buildings there. There's an eight unit apartment building next door. There's a two family right next doòr. It's a residential road. It's right down the street from the Schenectady City Garage. MR. THOMAS-What do the Board members think about that? Table it, let the neighbors, Mr. Kislowski said he would give them the names and numbers. He can bring back documentation from his old neighbors down there. Would that seem fair to everyone? MRS. DUROSS-You guys don't have to live up there. MR. MENTER-Wait a minute. The racket of motorcycles that you have lived with for the past three years is not in issue here. It's not. It's not his fault. We're talking about a change. We're talking about, how is this going to impact it, will it impact it? We're not talking about the fact that you've been kept up at night. It doesn't matter. It's irrelevant here. MR. GREEN-And I, personally, can't take that into account. MEMBER OF PUBLIC-We really don't care what was down in Schenectady. We care what was here. What's going to be here, in Queensbury. MRS. LAPHAM-But we have to deal with what's going to be here, not what was here. MR. BREWER-That's a city environment. This is a rural environment. MR. LEVACK-Seeing as how we've opened the public hearing again, I'd like to state that when these things in the future, and we try to get a very reasonable, realistic plan put forth, and they pass a petition to one neighbor and one neighbor passes it to the next because it's going around and they're all neighbors and they all want to sign it, I think the position that we must take is that we get 55 or 60 commercial property owners up and down that street, like Paul Brandt across the way, and Jack Carey and all these property owners and these heavy taxpayers in this Town, and we get 50 to 100 people here screaming for a business, a friendly business environment. If that's what we need to do to get these variances through because it's how many people can scream the loudest, then that's what we're going to have to do at these meetings, and I - 73 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) thought we laid forth a very realistic, very cooperative, very open minded plan here, and I think that some of the comments that have been made here on this Board this evening are just a little bit off center from the issues, and I think some of the Board members have kept to the issues, and I wish that you would keep to the issues. MR. O'LEARY-Which ones were on and which ones were off? MR. LEVACK-I thought that Bill's issues of the issues of the noise, I thought Dave's issue of the fact that the noise is not Mr. Kislowski's problem, I felt that Christian's attempt to try to say, lets work this out as neighbors is very much right on. He is financially strung out on the end of the limb right now and he's willing to do anything and everything it takes to put this business at this location. This is the location to have this business, and he's willing to work in any way possible to make these neighbors happy, to the point of helping to stop this traffic on the power line easement which he didn't create. MR. STONE-But it's not his hardship we're talking about. MR. LEVACK-But the hardship, again, I appreciate the opportunity to go back to a public hearing and make further argument to have Mr. Lebowitz in here. To say that there isn't an economic hardship on this building, if it's only been vacant for two years, does it need to be vacant for four years to have it deemed that there's been that economic hardship? MR. O'LEARY-In this economic community, maybe. MR. LEVACK-Then excuse me for being, I guess contradictory, but you need to know the real estate market. You need to know how many hundreds of properties and how many tens of thousands of square feet are available in this community right now and how it is desperately vital that we fill this space. This market is eroding. This tax base is eroding, and we have a Washington County scenario developing in this community that these properties are not worth what they're assessed for, and unless we get the tenant base back into these buildings, we have a downward spiral that we need to correct, and if you take a look at the, if you talk to the Assessor's Department, I think you'll find some of the answers that I'm alluding to here, and to say that a $495,000 asking price has prevented offers, there are buildings out there like the Troy Shirtmakers Guild building, assessed at a million four hundred and fifty thousand dollars. They just listed it for two hundred and fifty thousand, and we got an offer two hundred and fifty thousand. The real estate asking price on this property did not prevent an offer from being presented. The hardship is the economy and the economy is extremely bad, and that's why we're having to scrounge to. MR. KARPELES-But isn't that true in Highway Commercial zones, too? MR. LEVACK-And we were not able to locate that property, and I can bring in a list of all the. MR. KARPELES-I think you can do a better job of convincing us that there isn't anything available in the Highway Commercial zone. MR. LEVACK-That's a retail shop of 2,000 square feet on a corridor. I'd be happy to supply you with all the information you need. MR. KARPELES-That's what you should do. You should have done that. MR. LEVACK-Okay. Isn't it enough to say that I'm in the commercial real estate market for 10 years? - 74 - ---- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. KARPELES-No, we want proof. MR. LEVACK-Okay. MR. GREEN-See, but I don't think availability of other options is something, in my opinion, that takes an awful lot of weight. This the location that Mr. Kislowski has chosen. We should weigh the criteria that we have for this site, and the economic hardship of this site, not whether Mr. Kislowski has looked at other sites. MRS. LAPHAM-I have to agree with Bill, there. MR. STONE-But Bill, the Use Variance goes with the property, not with Mr. Kislowski. MR. LEVACK-We could terminate it with this tenant, if we're able to do that. Jack Lebowitz doesn' t want this Use Variance. Jim Kislowski needs the Use Variance. So to say that Jack Lebowitz, a guy in his 90's, needs to be here arguing financial hardship on this property, just so Jim, a 33 year old guy trying to grind out a living can go use this space. MR. O'LEARY-But the financial hardship test is not against Mr. Kislowski. MR. LEVACK-Right. I was alluding to the fact that he needs to be here making the argument. I'm his agent. It is as though Jack Lebowitz is sitting here talking to you, as his agent. I have as much right and authority to make that case as Jack Lebowitz does, and I felt I made that case tonight. MRS. LAPHAM-Jack Lebowitz has shown, through you, that there is a financial hardship. I have to agree with Bill there, because Mr. Kislowski doesn't have to show us really anything. MR. LEVACK-Right. MRS. LAPHAM-All he has to show us is what he wants to do there. MR. O'LEARY-I agree. MR. MENTER-I think that the Chairman had a good recommendation, and I would go along with that. I would urge the neighbors not to just shoot it down immediately because, as Mark said, there is possibility that it could work to your advantage, in terms of taking care of that, the right-of-way, traffic. Maybe something could be done on that property, but at least it's worth talking about. You may come out of this better off than you are. MEMBER OF PUBLIC-What he did down in Schenectady doesn't mean he's going to do the same here. MR. THOMAS-All right. MR. MENTER-We could do a couple of things. We could table it. We could table it for an opinion, or we could vote on it, or you could table it and see if they can come up with anything. I don't know if that's possible, see if they're willing to talk about it. MR. THOMAS-What's the wishes of the Board? What do you want to do, Lou? Do you want to table it? MR. STONE-It's five of twelve, and I think we're all tired. I think we ought to table it and discuss it again. MR. THOMAS-Okay. Don, table, push it through? MR. STONE-I don't see what we'll get out of tabling it. I think we - 75 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) have enough information to vote. MR. THOMAS-Bill, table it or push the motion? MR. GREEN-Well, since I'm in the minority, I'll table it. MR. THOMAS-Dave? MR. MENTER-I'd like to table it. MR. THOMAS-Table it. Bob? MR. KARPELES-I'd like to table it, too, but I'd like to be sure that they're going to work on this financial hardship, and try to come up with something better than they've got. I think that's what's really hanging me up. MR. THOMAS-Bonnie? MRS. LAPHAM- I think I'd like to table getting late, and I think Bill and completely. it, seeing as I are in the how it' s minority MR. THOMAS-We've got five table and one to push it. If we table it, we have 62 days to make a motion to approve or deny. MR. GORALSKI-That's correct. MEMBER OF PUBLIC~Is the business going to be run now? MR. KISLOWSKI-It isn't even open now. MR. THOMAS-Does somebody want to make a tabling motion? I'll open the public hearing back up so it does not have to be re-advertised. MOTION TO TABLE USE VARIANCE NO. 94-1996 JAMES C. KISLOWSKI, Introduced by Chris Thomas who moved for its adoption, seconded by Bonnie Lapham: For up to 62 days. Duly adopted this 16th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stone, Mr. Green, Mr. Menter, Mr. Karpeles, Mrs. Lapham, Mr. Thomas NOES: Mr. O'Leary MR. THOMAS-It's tabled for 62 days, up to 62 days, and everyone will be notified, not personally, but someone from the zoning office, if you call the zoning office. MR. GORALSKI-We'll contact the people that are here, and we'll let them know when it's back on the agenda. MR. LEVACK-Thank you for your time. USE VARIANCE NO. 93-1996 TYPE: UNLISTED SR-1A LORRAINE JUDE SPERO OWNER: VINCENT & LORRAINE SPERO 972 RIDGE ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO USE HER PROPERTY FOR THE SALE OF HANDCRAFTED ITEMS FROM AN EXISTING GARAGE. AS A PART OF THIS SALE THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO USE A SIGN IDENTIFYING THE SALE. RELIEF IS BEING REQUESTED FROM THE ALLOWED USES LISTED IN SECTION 179-19 AND THE REGULATIONS REGARDING PLACEMENT AND NUMBER OF FREESTANDING SIGNS LISTED IN SECTION 140-6B,3. WARREN COUNTY PLANNING 10/9/96 TAX MAP NO. 54- 1-10 LOT SIZE: 1.73 ACRES SECTION 140-6,3. JUDE SPERO, PRESENT - 76 - ~. (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Use variance No. 93-1996, Lorraine Jude Spero, Meeting Date: October 16,1996 "APPLICANT: Lorraine Spero PROJECT LOCATION: 972 Ridge Rd. PROPOSED PROJECT AND CONFORMANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE: The applicant is proposing to use her property for the sale of handcrafted items from an existing garage. As a part of this sale the applicant proposes to use a sign identifying the sale. Relief is being requested from the allowed uses in Section 179-19 and the regulation regarding placement and number of freestanding signs listed in Section 140-6B,3. REVIEW CRITERIA, BASED ON SECTION 267-b OF TOWN LAW: 1. IS A REASONABLE RETURN POSSIBLE IF THE LAND IS USED AS ZONED? It appears that this property which is currently being used as a single family residence could realize a reasonable return if used as zoned. 2. IS THE ALLEGED HARDSHIP RELATING TO THIS PROPERTY UNIQUE, OR DOES IT ALSO APPLY TO A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF THE DISTRICT OR NEIGHBORHOOD? The characteristics of this property appear to be the same as the surrounding neighborhood. 3. IS THERE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD? The proposed use could lead to requests of the same nature throughout this residential area. 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? The applicant has the option of operating a home occupation at this location. The regulations for a home occupation are listed in the Zoning Ordinance. STAFF COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: If the ZBA chooses to grant relief for this application a separate sign variance will not be needed. The applicant is seeking relief for proposed signage as a part of this use variance application. SEQR: Type Unlisted, Short Form EAF required. II MRS. LAPHAM- "At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board, held on the 9th day of October 1996, the above application for a Use variance to use her property for the sale of handcrafted items from an existinq qaraqe., was reviewed and the following action was taken. Recommendation to: No County Impact. Comments: The Board concurs with its decision on the previous application." Signed by C. powel South, Chairperson. MR. THOMAS-Mrs. Spero, you're up. MRS. SPERO-Does the Board have any questions that they would like to ask me about this? MR. THOMAS-Is there anything that you'd like to add to your application, or add, say, state? MRS. SPERO-Well, I guess not at this time. I guess I'm open to any questions that the Board might add. I think I've pretty much stated in my comments there what I'm about, what I'm doing. I'm sure you've all been to the site and seen what I do, and this is before you again. MR. KARPELES-What's different about this application than the previous one? MRS. SPERO-Well, the first time around I guess the limitations that could be applied to a variance were not really discussed, and that's why I was allowed to have another hearing on this. I was lead to believe that there were, I would be able to get a Use Variance with certain limitations on it, that I would still be able to continue doing what I'm doing, without having any kind of commercial future impact in the area. This was not intended to change the zoning of the property to commercial, just to be able to see my clients and sell my quilts out of my garage, nothing more than that. - 77 - '~ (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. THOMAS-Anymore questions for the applicant? MR. STONE-Well, my only question is, and the one that really hangs most of us up, is a reasonable return possible if the land is used as zoned? You can make a case, you didn't tonight, but you made a case prior that you had some trouble selling the quilts at another facility. You apparently didn't get paid or something. That, to me, is not proof that you can't make them at home, which you are perfectly legal to do so, and find a place to have them sold where it is legal to sell them. I see no economic justification for the sale going on in your home. MRS. SPERO-Well, actually, I do go to craft shows and I have tried other avenues, such as the store in the Mall, which turned out to be a disaster. The quilts that I sell are big ticket items, and it is very, very rare, at a craft show, that people have $250, $300 to spend on a quilt. Most of the sales of my actual quilts I have made through sales at my home, people stop by. They look at what I have. Later they come back, as a matter of fact, just this past week I had a couple call me from out of the area that had visited me a year ago and ordered a quilt. Now, that's not something that ever would have happened had they not seen my sign, stopped by and knew that I was there, and in the three years that I have been doing this, I think I've sold one queen sized quilt at a craft show. If I were unable to continue to sellout of my home, basically those types of sales would not happen for me, and that's where I make my money doing this. Sure, I'll go to a craft show and I'll work real hard at that, and I might walk away from that with $100, maybe $500 if it's a great sale, but if I have these clients coming to my home, looking at fabrics, discussing what their options are to bring warmth and comfort into their own homes and have a part in doing that, I'm not able to do that at a craft show. I need to be home for my children, and that is my main reason to do this. If I was able to open up a shop and be away from the area, well I wouldn't be here, but my whole reasoning behind this is to be able to be at home for my children and be able to see my clients at my home, do for them what I do, which I can't do at a craft show. I'm unable to rent a store front in order to do this. So that's my whole reasoning in wanting to do this and continue this. It's worked out very nicely for my family. It brings in that extra income that we greatly need, and if I were not able to do this at my home, I might as well just give it all up, because it's just not worth it to me to just hopefully maybe sell a quilt at a craft show and walk away from that with $100. It's just not, it just doesn't work that way, and I've been doing this long enough to know that, and I generate most of my quilt sales right in my home. That's where it happens, and I have people that visit me from those bed and breakfasts that have those big controversial signs. I've had that happen very often, where the people visiting the area are coming, the tourists stop. They see my sign. People expect that. They come to the Adirondacks, they're looking for something like that, and they love that. I've had people from allover the Country buy quilts in my garage. I have three quilts in California that were sold, made to order, from my garage, and that's never going to happen at a craft show. MR, THOMAS-Anyone else have any questions? The last time you were here you said you sold just your quilts out of the garage? MRS. SPERO-Yes. MR. THOMAS-And that's the only thing you sell is just the quilts that you make by hand? MRS. SPERO-Everything that I sell is made by me. Ninety percent of what I do are quilts or quilt related items. Sometimes I'll make a few little dolls or things like that. - 78 - -../ (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. THOMAS-Okay, but it's all stuff made by you? MRS. SPERO-Everything is made by me. MR. THOMAS-And everything that you make you sellout of your garage? MRS. SPERO-Yes. MR. THOMAS-I came across this piece of paper. familiar? Does it look MRS. SPERO-Yes. MR. THOMAS-It says, down there at the bottom, "Often featuring the work of selected local artisans". MRS. SPERO-Well, occasionally, we have a group that gets together and we'll do, like Balloon Festival weekend we had a few different people come and do something like that, which is something separate from what I normally do. MR. THOMAS-Yes, but is says often featuring. MRS. SPERO-We've had an Easter show that we've done, and we did one on the Fourth of July weekend, actually that one was canceled, but the Balloon Festival. So on occasions I've done that, but that's something that there's a lot of groups of crafters in the area that do that. This coming weekend there's going to be one going on up by Dean Road and 149. That's something that commonly happens among crafters. MR. THOMAS-According to that, you sell other people's artwork. MRS. SPERO-Well, only on those occasions. If I were to do that, then I would be taking on a consignment situation, and I don't intend to do that. MR. THOMAS-Anymore questions for the applicant? MR. STONE-That's a pretty damning piece of paper¡- it seems to me. MR. THOMAS-It does to me, too. I don't sell other people's work, and right there, phone number and everything. MRS. SPERO-Well, that's, like I had said, we do occasionally have a, like an open house type of a thing. They're there to sell those things with me. They're not there without their crafters. MR. THOMAS-Well, any more questions? If not, I'll open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. THOMAS-Any more questions for the applicant? MR. .GREEN-I have one question here. What is your justification that! you cannot use your home as a home owned? MRS. SPERO-My reasoning for having this home based business is because I have a handicapped child. MR. GREEN-Right. That I understand. The question is, that I have to be able to answer, is a reasonable return possible if the land - 79 - -'- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) used as zoned? It's zoned as Single Family Residential. Could a single family live in that house and derive what we would call economic return, meaning the use of the home? MRS. SPERO-Well, I suppose that they could, but in my particular situation, where we need that added income, it makes it extremely difficult to make our payments for everything involved in running a household, and by me seeking employment outside of the home creates a tremendous amount of stress on my family, due to the fact that my handicapped son is extremely impulsive and he needs constant supervision, and we've tried other routes. I have had employment outside of the home, and we just ran into so many problems with babysitters and what have you, that it just doesn't work, not in this particular situation. MR. THOMAS-Any more questions from the applicant? Lets go on down through. We'll start with you, Lou. What do you think? MR. STONE-Well, I'm stopped at the first one. I think a reasonable return of the land if used as zoned is possible. I think that the making of the quilt at home is a perfectly legal thing to do. I think seeking outside sales help is the place to go. I know there's a place, for example, in Bolton that I've been to a number of times that sells quilts. I have no idea whose quilts they are. I've never met the quilt maker, and yet if I wanted to buy a quilt, I would be more than willing to buy one there. So I think there are places to sell quilts. You may have had a bad experience. I understand that. It's unfortunate, but I think there are places that you can. MRS. SPERO-And in shops like that, you have to give up at least 30 to 40% of your profit, and that's where. MR. STONE-I'm inclined to deny the variance. MR. THOMAS-Don? MR. O'LEARY-Well, I must confess, the longer it goes on, the shakier I feel about my original vote, but I'm not going to change it from the first time around. I cast a favorable vote. MR. THOMAS-Bill? MR. GREEN-I would really, really love to give you this, but this, a Use variance is not based on a weighing of benefit to you versus detriment to the people around you. You have four questions that have to be answered, essentially yes or no, and I've tried some way to find where the house can't be used as a house and be fine, and I just can't, as much as I would like to be able to. MRS. SPERO-But if making a reasonable return on that house, if you lost your house because you're unable to meet your bills. MR. GREEN-Yes, but somebody else could come in there and use the house and maybe be able to make the payments. MRS. SPERO-But I'm not going to get the reasonable return on that. MR. GREEN-Well, Mr. Kislowski may not get his motorcycle shop, but somebody else may put a use in there that is acceptable. MRS. SPERO-Well, my quilts don't cause noise and pollution. I'm not doing anything to create any kind of a problem in my neighborhood. MR. GREEN-As I said, I have a hard time with the first one, as much as I would really like to see this, but there's all sorts of other houses right around you that are just houses, and people are making - 80 - ......, (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) payments and not having home based businesses. MRS. SPERO-Well, there are people with home based businesses. There's the Marcantonio's with their dogs, and there's the little fruit and vegetable stand up the road, which is part of the. MR. GREEN-Yes, but see these are all, as I said, pre-existing and what have you. MRS. SPERO-There's the bed and breakfast, and those people live in those bed and breakfasts, and there's two of them right there along the road, and what about the guy with the squash and the tomatoes, and he's got his sign out there all the time. There's the boat place there. I mean, it's not like I'm just suddenly putting up a Walmart there. I just have half of my garage, not even half of my garage, set up with a little display of my quilts and a small sign out there, and it's been there, and it's never caused a problem, never had any problem with traffic or complaints from any of the neighbors, and we had one disgruntled citizen, he didn't get his way, so he figured, well, I'm not going to sit back and let anybody else have anything either, and that's kind of a lousy way to look at things. MR. GREEN-As I said, I am very sympathetic to your situation, but I can't answer that question correctly, or positively I mean. MR. THOMAS-Dave? MR. MENTER-Well, I haven't changed my basic thought on this, and you know what that is I think. It's not even a question of answering these questions favorable for you. These questions don' t even pertain to you. It says, is the alleged hardship relating to this property, there is no hardship related to the property. Is the alleged hardship relating to the property unique or does it apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood. There's no hardship. There hasn't been any suggestion of hardship related to the property. It's not something that we have the latitude to make a judgement on it, i my opinion. MR. THOMAS-Bob? MR. KARPELES-Well, I haven't changed illY opinion. I don't believe that there's been anything new introduced, other than this lettêr that's been circulated, or this pamphlet, which reinforces my original opinion. MR. THOMAS-Bonnie? MRS. LAPHAM-Well, my thinking really was going kind of along with Dave's, that there is no unique problem with the property at all. A reasonable return would be possible as a Single Family. There is no hardship as far as this property is concerned. Commercial development could bring an adverse effect on the essential character of the neighborhood. Mrs. Spero has a unique problem, in that she needs to be home with a handicapped child, but I don't think that there's any relation to the property. If there is some compromise that could be made, a variance that only worked for her, that had to be, I mean, I think we explored this last time and we said it wasn't possible, but I would be willing to explore compromises, a variance that lasted as long as she lived there, for example. When they sold the house, it reverted to Single Family Residential. MR. MENTER-Bonnie, what that is is granting a variance with stipulation, but still you can't change the steps to get to that granting a variance. If you put stipulations on it, it doesn't mean you don't need to meet the criteria. - 81 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MRS. LAPHAM-So, it doesn't mean that I can ignore the fact that there's no hardship or nothing unique or unusual about this property. MR. MENTER-That would be illY interpretation of that. MRS. LAPHAM-Rather than focus on the personal unique situation. MR. MENTER-Well, to grant the variance, you must do certain things. You must find certain things, okay. Once you get to the point of, okay, we're going to grant a variance, we want to do it this way and make sure this happens and this happens and this happens, but it doesn't change the fact that to grant a variance, you need to find certain things. MRS. LAPHAM-Okay. I see what you're saying to me is I'm skipping over the things I had to find and focusing on her personal, unique situation. MR. MENTER-Yes. MRS. LAPHAM-Which we cannot do, is what you're telling me. MRS. SPERO-Why can't my explanation of effecting our financial situation to reasonable return means that you can sell I would say the market value is. interpretation? what, I mean, if this is that point, I mean, a the property and get what Is that the correct MR. MENTER-See, the Zoning Board is designed not to be dependent on people's individual financial circumstances. It's designed to be responsive to somebody who gets hurt because of a Zoning Ordinance, financially. MRS. SPERO-But this is hurting me financially because of the Zoning Ordinance. MR. MENTER-But it would only hurt you. It wouldn't hurt all the other people that might come and buy that house, or your neighbors. It only hurts YOU because of your situation. It's not originated from the Ordinance. MRS. SPERO-Well, I can't see how that could be. I mean, the Ordinance is the thing that's creating the hardship. MR. MENTER-Well, in this statement, is the alleged hardship relating to this property unique? The alleged hardship relating to this property. The hardship is relating to you, and I don't mean to be, I hate to sound so cold, because I like what you're doing. I mean, I respect your tenacity and I think somehow you're going to make it work. MRS. SPERO-Well, that's why I'm here. I need to be able to continue to do this, and, I mean, if you want personal financial statements from me, I mean, I certainly didn' t feel that our financial statements should be that of public record. MR. GREEN-If I could buy the house and live in it, just live in it, and get an economic return out of the house. MRS. SPERO-But if I'm put into a situation where it becomes such a hardship that we're not able to meet our mortgage payments or pay our bills because I'm losing the income from this. MR. GREEN-If I don't have enough money to pay my bills on my house, I've got to move, or I've got to find a job that I can do it. MRS. SPERO-But I have a way that I can help supplement our income, - 82 - --' '- (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) and I feel well, gosh, why did we move here in the first place? I don't think I should have to compromise our standard of living. MR. KARPELES-You should have moved somewhere else where you could do that, where that zoning wasn't in effect. MRS. SPERO-At the time that we bought that house my children were small, and it was always intended that I would go on to work when they were of school age, and I did that, but it turned into a situation where I needed to be home with the children, because of the continuing impulsive behavior of my older child, and I need to be there for him. MR. GREEN-Well, this may not be the home that you need to be in then. MRS. SPERO-Well, why should we have to compromise our standard of living just because we have a handicapped child? MR. MENTER-That's the law that we have to live by. MR. STONE-Yes, that's the law. MR. MENTER-We don't make the law. It's very clearly defined exactly what we do. In my interpretation, you are not even eligible for consideration for a variance. MRS. SPERO-Well, that's not what I was lead to believe. MR. MENTER- I mean, you're eligible for consideration, but you don't, the questions can't even be asked, in a sense, because the hardship is not relating to the property. The Town can only be concerned about the property. It's concerned about people, but the questions go to the property. They can' t change based on individual hardships allover Town. There would be no reason to have any zoning whatsoever. MRS. SPERO-Well, it seems to me that the almighty dollar is the only thing that's important here as far as the property goes, and that's not what this is about. MR. MENTER-I agree. It does seem that way. MRS. SPERO-It really does, and it makes it seem like we live in a gestapo community. I'm sorry. MR. STONE-Well, that's not the case. I mean, the community has agreed that we want zoning. We have a Zoning Ordinance in place. It is a viable, living law. It changes and it will be changing in the next two years. I'm sure there's probably a movement to change it, but the zoning law is the zoning law. The interpretations of how variances are applied have been set by the courts. We are following the guidelines on the property. We all sympathize with you. There's no question about that. MRS. SPERO-Well, you are the only ones that can do anything about this. MR. STONE-But we have to look at the land, the property, not the people who own the property. MRS. SPERO-Well, if it wasn't for the people owning the property, there would be no reason for any of us to be here. MR. MENTER-Well, I'll tell you what, zoning works wonderfully. MRS. SPERO-It all goes hand in hand. The people that live on that property have needs, too. - 83 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) MR. MENTER-See, I believe that zoning worked well for hundreds of people in this Town today. MR. STONE-Would you like it if a heavy construction organization moved in next to you? MRS. SPERO-I don't think that you can compare a heavy construction outfit to a quilt. MR. STONE-No. That's what zoning does. It protects property, and that's what this zoning is doing, is protecting the property and the property around it. That's what we have to look at. MRS. SPERO-Well, if I was granted a variance with the restrictions upon it that would only allow me to do certain things, and the variance would no longer exist at the time that the property was to be sold, if and when that were to happen, I don't see how this could have any impact whatsoever on anything. MR. STONE-As Dave said, we can't get to those conditions until we get to granting a variance, and most of us can't get that far based upon our interpretation of the requirements. MR. MENTER-Suppose your holiday sales, which they must have done well if you've tried it more than once, or you've had other people bring some things over. Suppose that went wonderfully. You would be in a real dilemma. Should I get a couple of more people? What if you had artisans call you saying, listen, I heard you had a great thing goirtg on Easter, next Easter, I want to get in on it. So suddenly you've got this big thing on Easter, and your neighbor has relatives over on Easter. MRS. SPERO-There are very many of these holiday open houses throughout the area with many crafters involved in doing this, and like I had mentioned earlier, there is going to be one of these house to house tours throughout the area this coming weekend, where there are going to be many, many people doing exactly that, and different crafters invite several other crafters into their home, and they all display their things in these homes, and people come to them, they tour them, and it's a wonderful thing that happens several times a year throughout the area, and people just love that. I can't see how that would have any kind of a negative impact on any of this. If I choose to have an open house occasionally on a holiday, I don't see how that has any impact on what I'm doing the rest of the year, and basically what I do in my garage tends to be very seasonable. Once the weather gets bad, it's not even there. MR. THOMAS-I've been listening to everybody, and everybody makes sense. It's the thing of it that it goes with the land. It doesn't go with the person, like I said before. MRS. SPERO-But if the person stands to lose the land, it does go with the land. MR. MENTER-That's where this job gets hard. MRS. SPERO-Well, I'm asking you all to reach down and do the right thing. MR. MENTER-I did. MR. THOMAS-We can reach down as far as we want, but the State, under their decrees of how the Town law reads, says we have to do different. Everybody here would love to give you this Use Variance, but the law says that if you can't prove those four questions, you can't answer those four questions to our satisfaction, we can't give it to you. That's cut and dried, - 84 - --' (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) Reader's Digest version of it. MR. GREEN-If we did, your neighbor could sue the Town and get it overturned, possibly, or whoever, somebody could. MRS. SPERO-Well, my neighbors don't have any objection to this whatsoever. MR. THOMAS-Anyone in the Town could. MR. GREEN-Or the guy that got turned down last week for the same reason we're turning YOU down. He's going to come back and say, well, she got it. MRS. SPERO-Well, does he have a handicapped child to be taken into consideration there? That's what this is all about. MR. THOMAS-No. It's not all about. In your mind that's what it's all about. MRS. SPERO-Of course it is. That's my whole reason for doing this. MR. THOMAS-Everybody understands your plight, but we have a strict set of rules that we have to follow, that we try to follow, and you haven't come up and answered the strict set of rules, the four questions that the rules have provided. So, having said that, would someone like to make a motion? MR. GORALSKI-Can I just say one thing, and it's up to Mrs. Spero. Many times people don' t understand. Variances, especially Use Variances, are a legal issue. There's a law that needs to be followed. Unfortunately, when laws need to be followed, often times, attorneys need to get involved. I don't know if you want the opportunity to consult a lawyer before the Board makes a motion. I don't know if the Board would consider giving you that opportunity, but since we've gone this far, we've gone through this a second time, it might be something to consider, if you're interested in looking into it. MRS. SPERO-I can't afford an attorney. MR. STONE-Well, Mrs. Spero, let me say one thing. You saw the soft side of us when you came to us last month, when we agreed, unanimously, to let you re-apply. That was the soft side. We all were hoping that you could come up with something that would allow us to grant the variance. Unfortunately, you could not, but that was the soft side of us. This is the legal side of us. MR. THOMAS-Would anyone like to make a motion? MOTION TO DENY USE VARIANCE NO. 93-1996 LORRAINE JUDE SPERO, Introduced by Chris Thomas who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Karpeles: The applicant has not proven that a reasonable return can be realized if the land is used as zoned. The alleged hardship relating to this property is not unique. It's a single family residential dwelling. Would there be an adverse effect on the essential character of the neighborhood? Probably not because what the applicant proposes to do would be mostly inside with the only thing showing would be a sign outside. 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 safety, health and welfare of the community? No. This isn' t the minimum variance to address that criteria because there is no minimum, and that all the members of the Board are sympathetic toward the applicant, but the reality of the law states that we have to do what we have to do, and that's to turn - 85 - (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 10/16/96) down the variance. Duly adopted this 16th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Karpeles, Mrs. Lapham, Mr. Stone, Mr. Green, Mr. Menter, Mr. Thomas NOES: Mr. O'Leary MR. THOMAS-The variance is denied. MR. GREEN-Do we have any other business? MR. THOMAS-No, no other business. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christian Thomas, Chairman - 86 -