Letter from O'Connor ►- 0 •
LITTLE & O'CONNOR
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
NINETEEN WEST NOTRE DAME STREET - P. O. BOX 898
GLENS FALLS, NEW YORK 1 2 80 1-0898
J. DAVID LITTLE TEL 518 792-2113
MICHAEL J. O'CONNOR FAX 518792-6972
MARK S. DELSIGNOR£
August 15,2002 RECEIVED
AUG 1 5 200a
Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
Queensbury Planning Board PLANNING OFFICE
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Road
Queensbury,NY 12804
Re: Application of James J.Grande, 3222 Route 9- Zone: WR-3A
Applicant proposes construction of 892 square foot, 1 story-(15 feet- 10 inches high)3 car
garage with dwelling unit of 382 square feet attached; said dwelling unit replaces pre-existing,
free-standing dwelling unit of same size;said unit shall not now, nor in the future be used as
rental unit;variance is request for permission to have second dwelling unit with second dwelling
unit being less than 800 square feet.
Dear Members of the Zoning Board:
We have been retained to represent James J. Grande in connection with the above application.
In reviewing minutes of prior meetings,it does not appear as though the uniqueness of this
property has been sufficiently emphasized or focused on.
What has been requested will not introduce something new to this property or its neighborhood.
What has been requested will not set a precedent that others can claim benefit from.
This property is unique because:
1)It ah-eady has a second dwellingtresidence,as defined by our Zoning Ordinance, on the lot,
which contains"a bath,a kitchen, a living room and a studio thing(J. Hayes)."
2)It has a Deed restriction that limits the use of this second dwellingtresidence prohibiting its use
for rental purposes. The language of that restriction is, in part, as follows:
"One residence with auxiliary out-building for the accommodation of a single family,its servants,
and non-paying guests."
This is an auxiliary out-building,even if the zoning statute, because it has its own kitchen,
considers it a second dwelling/residence. By the language of this restriction, which is unique to this
property,even though it might be considered a second dwelling or residence under zoning, can be used
only in conjunction with the single-family principal residence that is on the premises and can be used only
on a non-rental basis.
WEB SITE: hap://.w.capitcl.not/com/littleoc _
EMAIL: littleot@capital.net
Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Queensbury Planning Board
August 15, 2002
Page 2
Looking at the comments of many at the last two meetings,there seems to be
confusion with what will happen to this building in the future if the owner of the property
changes. It is no different than the existing out-building or auxiliary building. It still will
be restricted by this restriction.
3) This property has,for years, has been assessed at multi-family. This, in fact,
surprised me, and I know of few other homes with this set-up that are assessed that way.
The assessment, in fact, reflects the actual facts of the property and probably reflected the
actual facts of the property prior to and through existing zoning. This property is multi-
family in that right now, it has two residences, as defined by our Zoning Ordinance on
same.
The essence of this application is to allow the property owner to have two
structures on the property as opposed to three structures. It's that simple! The applicant
could build the proposed garage and leave the existing free-standing cabin as a second
dwelling/residence, and through repairs and maintenance,bring that unit up-to-date.
Rather than do that, this owner has tried to look at each and every alternative that is
available; and although he would have preferred a smaller footprint of a building with a
second story,has brought his proposed construction into compliance height-wise and
size-wise, except for the fact that the second dwelling/residence is being maintained at
the prior existing size,which is less than 800 square feet. To look at this 382 square foot
dwelling as a"residence" or"dwelling" is hard to understand. Is it really believable that
someone would live in this unit, independent of the principle residence on this site. The
size of this unit, in itself, is something that is unique; in something that the applicant is
maintaining by not increasing size. This living area, whether it be in a free-standing
cabin, as it presently exists, or is attached to the garage, is certainly a"auxiliary out-
building".
The proposal is an improvement over what is there presently, in that, it will
remove the existing cabin,which is not in compliance with set-back restrictions, given
the owner and the adjoining owner better opportunity to landscape.
Very truly yours,
LITTLE&O'CONNOR
by: Michael J. onnor
MOC/dn `VVVVV�